Welcome to our book review site go-pdf.online!
You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Law, Politics, and Perception
Are judges' decisions more likely to be based on personal inclinations or legal authority? The answer, Eileen Braman argues, is both. Law, Politics, and Perception brings cognitive psychology to bear on the question of the relative importance of norms of legal reasoning versus decision markers' policy preferences in legal decision-making. While Braman acknowledges that decision makers' attitudes—or, more precisely, their preference for policy outcomes—can play a significant role in judicial decisions, she also believes that decision-makers' belief that they must abide by accepted rules of legal analysis significantly limits the role of preferences in their judgements. To reconcile these ...
Constitutional Powers and Politics
The relationship between public opinion and the actions of institutions such as the Supreme Court has come under increased scrutiny in recent years. In this timely book, Eileen Braman explores how American citizens think about government across all three branches, applying a rigorous political scientific methodology to explore why citizens may support potentially risky changes to our governing system. As Braman highlights, Americans value institutions that they perceive as delivering personal and societal gains, and citizens who see these institutions as delivering potential losses are more supportive of fundamental constitutional change. In the face of growing resentment of government and recurring warnings of constitutional crisis, Braman offers a hopeful note: her findings suggest that politicians can channel discontent toward meaningful reform and the healthy evolution of our democratic system.
Analogical Reasoning in Law
This work tackles the most intriguing type of reasoning which one may employ within the field of law. In addition to the merits and drawbacks of legal analogy, it discusses the orthodox approaches to it, together with their critical analysis, also posing challenges that these conceptions have difficulty in managing. As an alternative, the book advances an account of legal analogical reasoning that correlates well with the division into rational and intuitive thinking that occurs in contemporary psychology. By doing so, many of the unique properties of legal analogy which have been traditionally associated with it and which have often been difficult to explain become readily understandable. Moreover, the very source of the almost mystical faith in power and infallibleness of such analogy is revealed here, while this faith—astonishing or not—not only escapes condemnation, but is shown to be warranted from a scientific point of view. Finally, the book also presents vast scope of application, premises, schematic structures and factors able to influence the force of legal analogy.
Courting Peril
"Beginning with the Vietnam War and Watergate, public support for the institutions of American government has been in a state of decline, as Congress and the president have lurched from one scandal to the next. The judiciary has tried to duck the bruising body blows absorbed by the so-called political branches of government by remaining above the fray, through recourse to a centuries-old rule-of-law paradigm. The paradigm holds that if we leave judges be and respect their independence, they will set politics and other influences aside and uphold the rule of law. While the public has never regarded the state and federal judiciaries as apolitical, bias-free zones, it has nonetheless embraced t...
What's Law Got to Do With It?
Top US legal scholars and political scientists examine how the law shapes judges’ behavior and decisions, and what it means for society at large. Although there is a growing consensus among legal scholars and political scientists, significant points of divergence remain. Contributors to What’s Law Got to Do with It? explore ways to reach greater accord on the complexity and nuance of judicial decision making and judicial elections, while acknowledging that agreement on what judges do is not likely to occur any time soon. As the first forum in which political scientists and legal scholars engage with one another on these hot button issues, this volume strives to establish a true interdisc...
Harvard Law Review: Volume 125, Number 1 - November 2011
The Harvard Law Review is offered in a digital edition for ereaders, featuring active Table of Contents, linked footnotes and cross-references, legible tables, and proper ebook formatting. The Review generally publishes articles by professors, judges, and practitioners and solicits reviews of important recent books from recognized experts. Most student writing takes the form of Notes, Recent Cases, Recent Legislation, and Book Notes. This current issue of the Review is November 2011, the first issue of academic year 2011-2012 (Volume 125). The November issue is the special annual review of the Supreme Court's previous term. Each year, the issue is introduced by noteworthy and extensive artic...
The Psychology of Judicial Decision Making
Over the years, psychologists have devoted uncountable hours to learning how human beings make judgments and decisions. As much progress as scholars have made in explaining what judges do over the past few decades, there remains a certain lack of depth to our understanding. Even where scholars can make consensual and successful predictions of a judge's behavior, they will often disagree sharply about exactly what happens in the judge's mind to generate the predicted result. This volume of essays examines the psychological processes that underlie judicial decision making.
The Hollow Core of Constitutional Theory
The first major scholarly defense of the centrality of the Framers' intentions in constitutional interpretation to appear in years.
The Oxford Handbook of U.S. Judicial Behavior
"[This book offers] an introduction and analysis of research regarding decision making by judges serving on federal and state courts in the U.S...[This handbook] describes and explains how the courts' political and social context, formal institutional structures, and informal norms affect judicial decision making. The Handbook also explores the impact of judges' personal attributes and preferences, as well as prevailing legal doctrine, influence, and shape case outcomes in state and federal courts. The volume also proposes avenues for future research in the various topics addressed throughout the book."--
Partisan Supremacy
“I have no agenda,” US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts proclaimed at his Senate confirmation hearing: “My job is to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.” This declaration was in keeping with the avowed independence of the judiciary. It also, when viewed through the lens of Roberts’s election law decisions, appears to be false. With a scrupulous reading of judicial decisions and a careful assessment of partisan causes and consequences, Terri Jennings Peretti tells the story of the GOP’s largely successful campaign to enlist judicial aid for its self-interested election reform agenda. Partisan Supremacy explores four contemporary election law issues—voter iden...
