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.
Making the Supreme Court
In Making the Supreme Court, Charles M. Cameron and Jonathan P. Kastellec examine 90 years of American political history to show how the growth of federal judicial power from the 1930s onward inspired a multitude of groups struggling to shape judicial policy. As Cameron and Kastellec argue, the result is a new politics aimed squarely at selecting and placing judicial ideologues on the Court. They make the case that this new model gradually transformed how the Court itself operates, turning it into an ideologically driven and polarized branch. Based on rich data and qualitative evidence, Making.
Hierarchical and Collegial Politics on the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Do hierarchical politics in the federal judiciary shape collegial politics on the U.S. Courts of Appeals and thus influence judicial voting and case outcomes? I develop a model in which the political control of the dual layer of hierarchy above three-judge panels - full circuits and the Supreme Court - affects the ability of a single Democratic or Republican judge on a three-judge panel to influence two colleagues from the opposing party. The theory predicts that panel majorities should be more strongly influenced by a single judge of the opposing party - a "counter-judge" - when that judge is aligned with the Supreme Court. Examining thousands of judicial votes in multiple issue areas, I show that the effect of adding a counter-judge to a panel is indeed asymmetric, and varies based on hierarchical alignment. The interaction of hierarchical and collegial politics increases the Supreme Court's control of the judicial hierarchy and helps promotes the rule of law.
The Statistical Analysis of Judicial Decisions and Legal Rules with Classification Trees
A key question in the quantitative study of legal rules and judicial decision making is the structure of the relationship between case facts and case outcomes. Legal doctrine and legal rules are general attempts to define this relationship. This article summarizes and utilizes a statistical method relatively unexplored in political science and legal scholarship - classification trees - that offers a flexible way to study legal doctrine. I argue that this method, while not replacing traditional statistical tools for studying judicial decisions, can better capture many aspects of the relationship between case facts and case outcomes. To illustrate the method's advantages, I conduct classification tree analyses of search and seizure cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court and confession cases decided by the courts of appeals. These analyses illustrate the ability of classification trees to increase our understanding of legal rules and legal doctrine.
Making the Supreme Court
"Making the Supreme Court: The Politics of Appointments 1930--2020 tells the story of 90 years of Supreme Court appointments. It examines what happened, why it happened, the consequences for the Supreme Court, the future of appointments, and the prospects for reform. Based on massive data combined with rich qualitative evidence, Making the Supreme Court employs new theories, cutting-edge technique, and a novel perspective on political institutions. Finally, it provides a sharp lens on the social and political transformations that created a new American politics. It will appeal not only to students of the Supreme Court but to anyone concerned with the origins and future of American politics"--
Judicial Federalism and Representation
This paper evaluates how the power of federal courts in a system of dual federalism affects state-level representation. I develop a framework in which federal courts establish a "federal floor" in a given policy area, thus creating an asymmetry -- states in which the legislature has chosen a lower level are compelled to shift policy to the floor, whereas states in which legislatures or voters prefer levels above the floor are unaffected. I develop versions of the framework in which the status quo at the state level may lag behind changes in public opinion, and in which cross-state moral externalities exist. In doing so, I use the framework to recast the familiar "counter-majoritarian difficulty" -- the problem of unelected judges striking down legislation enacted by elected legislatures -- as an issue of federalism. To illustrate the framework, I present a quantitative analysis of the path to the legalization of same-sex marriage in all 50 states, using both original and existing data on public opinion, federal and state judicial decisions, and state-level policy.
Case Selection and the Study of Judicial Politics
One complication in studying the Supreme Court and the judicial hierarchy is that the Court's docket is now nearly completely discretionary. Although the justices' strategies in picking cases affect the observations we can make and the inferences we draw, this is rarely taken into account in studies of judicial politics. In this paper, we study how case selection can affect our inferences within judicial politics, including those about decision making in the Supreme Court itself (such as whether law constrains the justices) and throughout the judicial hierarchy (such as whether lower courts comply with Supreme Court doctrine). We use Fourth Amendment case data to show that the inferential problems raised by the Court's case selection range from moderate to severe. At stake are substantive conclusions within some of the most important and controversial debates in judicial politics.
Making the Supreme Court
"Making the Supreme Court: The Politics of Appointments 1930--2020 tells the story of 90 years of Supreme Court appointments. It examines what happened, why it happened, the consequences for the Supreme Court, the future of appointments, and the prospects for reform. Based on massive data combined with rich qualitative evidence, Making the Supreme Court employs new theories, cutting-edge technique, and a novel perspective on political institutions. Finally, it provides a sharp lens on the social and political transformations that created a new American politics. It will appeal not only to students of the Supreme Court but to anyone concerned with the origins and future of American politics"--
Panel Composition and Judicial Compliance on the Us Courts of Appeals
This article integrates the literatures on judicial compliance, panel decision making, and case selection in the federal judiciary hierarchy. Many studies have speculated that panel effects -the phenomena under which an individual judge's vote may depend on her colleagues on a three-judge panel-can be tied to a whistleblower effect, through which a lower court judge can constrain a panel majority from disobeying with Supreme Court precedent by threatening to dissent. However, no study has systematically found such a relationship. I present a game-theoretic model of circuit court-Supreme Court interaction that demonstrates how panel composition might affect the likelihood of lower court compliance to Supreme Court doctrine. The model illustrates how three-judge panels, while not inducing perfect doctrinal control of lower courts by the Supreme Court, significantly increases the latter's ability to see its preferred doctrine carried out by its subordinates in the judicial hierarchy.
Research Methods in Human Rights
In this thoroughly revised second edition editors Bård A. Andreassen, Claire Methven O’Brien and Hans-Otto Sano advance contemporary discussions on human rights methodology, bringing together an array of leading scholars to offer instruction and guidance on the methodological approaches to human rights research.
Fifty Years at the US Environmental Protection Agency
In conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, this book brings together leading scholars and EPA veterans to provide a comprehensive assessment of the agency’s key decisions and actions in the various areas of its responsibility. Themes across all chapters include the role of rulemaking, negotiation/compromise, partisan polarization, judicial impacts, relations with the White House and Congress, public opinion, interest group pressures, environmental enforcement, environmental justice, risk assessment, and interagency conflict. As no other book on the market currently discusses EPA with this focus or scope, the authors have set out to provide a comprehensive analysis of the agency’s rich 50-year history for academics, students, professional, and the environmental community.
