Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
3,558
result(s) for
"Clark, Tom"
Sort by:
How to improve at playing guitar
Using a combination of easy-to-follow text, step-by-step photography, and diagrams, this guide provides all you need to achieve your guitar goals. Whether it's the electric, bass, or acoustic guitar, you'll find detailed information on the different styles plus tips and advice on buying the right guitar. You'll also be inspired by reading how famous guitarists reached the top.
Book
The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy
A major focus of judicial politics research has been the extent to which ideological divergence between the Court and Congress can explain variation in Supreme Court decision making. However, conflicting theoretical and empirical findings have given rise to a significant discrepancy in the scholarship. Building on evidence from interviews with Supreme Court justices and former law clerks, I develop a formal model of judicial-congressional relations that incorporates judicial preferences for institutional legitimacy and the role of public opinion in congressional hostility towards the Supreme Court. An original dataset identifying all Court-curbing legislation proposed between 1877 and 2006 is then used to assess the influence of congressional hostility on the Court's use of judicial review. The evidence indicates that public discontent with the Court, as mediated through congressional hostility, creates an incentive for the Court to exercise self-restraint. When Congress is hostile, the Court uses judicial review to invalidate Acts of Congress less frequently than when Congress is not hostile towards the Court.
Journal Article
Precedent and Doctrine in a Complicated World
Courts resolve individual disputes and create principles of law to justify their decisions and guide the resolution of future cases. Those tasks present informational challenges that affect the whole judicial process. Judges must simultaneously learn about (1) the particular facts and legal implications of any dispute; (2) discover the doctrine that appropriately resolves the dispute; and (3) attempt to articulate those rules in the context of a single case so that future courts may reason from past cases. We propose a model of judicial learning and decision making in which there is a complicated relationship between facts and legal outcomes. The model has implications for many of the important questions in the judicial process, including the dynamics of common law development, the path-dependent nature of the law, and optimal case selection by supervisory courts.
Journal Article
Should I Use Fixed or Random Effects?
Empirical analyses in social science frequently confront quantitative data
that are clustered or grouped. To account for group-level variation and
improve model fit, researchers will commonly specify either a fixed- or
random-effects model. But current advice on which approach should be
preferred, and under what conditions, remains vague and sometimes
contradictory. This study performs a series of Monte Carlo simulations to
evaluate the total error due to bias and variance in the inferences of each
model, for typical sizes and types of datasets encountered in applied
research. The results offer a typology of dataset characteristics to help
researchers choose a preferred model.
Journal Article
Scaling Politically Meaningful Dimensions Using Texts and Votes
Item response theory models for roll-call voting data provide political scientists with parsimonious descriptions of political actors' relative preferences. However, models using only voting data tend to obscure variation in preferences across different issues due to identification and labeling problems that arise in multidimensional scaling models. We propose a new approach to using sources of metadata about votes to estimate the degree to which those votes are about common issues. We demonstrate our approach with votes and opinion texts from the U.S. Supreme Court, using latent Dirichlet allocation to discover the extent to which different issues were at stake in different cases and estimating justice preferences within each of those issues. This approach can be applied using a variety of unsupervised and supervised topic models for text, community detection models for networks, or any other tool capable of generating discrete or mixture categorization of subject matter from relevant vote-specific metadata.
Journal Article
Our stories carried us here : a graphic novel anthology
The first national graphic anthology of 10 U.S. immigrants and refugees illustrated by 10 immigrants and refugees from all over the world.
BOOK
The Supreme Court's Many Median Justices
One-dimensional spatial models have come to inform much theorizing and research on the U.S. Supreme Court. However, we argue that judicial preferences vary considerably across areas of the law, and that limitations in our ability to measure those preferences have constrained the set of questions scholars pursue. We introduce a new approach, which makes use of information about substantive similarity among cases, to estimate judicial preferences that vary across substantive legal issues and over time. We show that a model allowing preferences to vary over substantive issues as well as over time is a significantly better predictor of judicial behavior than one that only allows preferences to vary over time. We find that judicial preferences are not reducible to simple left-right ideology and, as a consequence, there is substantial variation in the identity of the median justice across areas of the law during all periods of the modern court. These results suggest a need to reconsider empirical and theoretical research that hinges on the existence of a single pivotal median justice.
Journal Article