Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
3,157
result(s) for
"Martin, Andrew D."
Sort by:
Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging
We explore the role of sex in judging by addressing two questions of long-standing interest to political scientists: whether and in what ways male and female judges decide cases distinctly—\"individual effects\"—and whether and in what ways serving with a female judge causes males to behave differently—\"panel effects.\" While we attend to the dominant theoretical accounts of why we might expect to observe either or both effects, we do not use the predominant statistical tools to assess them. Instead, we deploy a more appropriate methodology: semiparametric matching, which follows from a formal framework for causal inference. Applying matching methods to 13 areas of law, we observe consistent gender effects in only one—sex discrimination. For these disputes, the probability of a judge deciding in favor of the party alleging discrimination decreases by about 10 percentage points when the judge is a male. Likewise, when a woman serves on a panel with men, the men are significantly more likely to rule in favor of the rights litigant. These results are consistent with an informational account of gendered judging and are inconsistent with several others.
Journal Article
Mississippi roll
Now on its final voyage, the historical steamboat Natchez is known for her super-powered guest entertainers. But after the suspicious death of a crew member, retired NY police detective Leo Storgman decides to make this incident his personal case. His findings only lead to a growing number of questions. Is there some truth behind the ghostly sightings of the steamboat's first captain Wilbur Leathers? What secret does the current captain seem to be hiding? And could the Natchez be ferrying mysterious - and possibly dangerous - cargo onboard?
Book
Infinity wars
What does Infinity hold for the Marvel Universe? As the Infinity Stones come to Earth, so too comes the war for control over them. But none who wield the stones truly understand the power they contain...or comprehend what it would take to bring them to their end! The nature of the cosmos itself hangs in the balance as we learn the answer to the question on everyone's lips: Who is Requiem? The ramifications of this story will be felt throughout Infinity for years to come! As cosmic war begins to rage, Gerry Duggan and Mike Deodato Jr. gaze into the Infinite - and bring the truth to light!
Book
Who Controls the Content of Supreme Court Opinions?
Conventional arguments identify either the median justice or the opinion author as the most influential justices in shaping the content of Supreme Court opinions. We develop a model of judicial decision making that suggests that opinions are likely to reflect the views of the median justice in the majority coalition. This result derives from two features of judicial decision making that have received little attention in previous models. The first is that in deciding a case, justices must resolve a concrete dispute, and that they may have preferences over which party wins the specific case confronting them. The second is that justices who are dissatisfied with an opinion are free to write concurrences (and dissents). We demonstrate that both features undermine the bargaining power of the Court's median and shift influence towards the coalition median. An empirical analysis of concurrence behavior provides significant support for the model.
Journal Article
The Judicial Common Space
To say that positive political theory (PPT) scholarship on the hierarchy of justice is theory rich and data poor is to make a rather uncontroversial claim. For over a decade now, scholars have offered intriguing theoretical accounts aimed at understanding why lower courts defy (comply with) higher courts. But only rarely do they subject the accounts to rigorous empirical interrogation. The chief obstacle, it seems, is the lack of a reliable and valid measurement strategy for placing judges of lower courts and justices of higher courts in the same policy space. Without such a strategy, we can systematically test few, if any, hypotheses flowing from PPT models of the judicial hierarchy. With such an approach not only can we investigate the implications of these models, we can assess many others flowing from the larger PPT program on judging, as well. It is to the challenge of scaling judges and justices (as well as legislatures and executives) that we turn in this article. We begin by explicating our measurement strategy, and then by explaining its advantages over previous efforts. Next we explore the results of our approach and provide a descriptive look at data it yields: a “Judicial Common Space” (JCS) score for all justices and judges appointed since 1953. The last section offers three applications designed to shore up the suitability and adaptability of the JCS for a range of positive projects on the courts.
Journal Article
The Norm of Prior Judicial Experience and Its Consequences for Career Diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court
For at least three decades now, those charged with nominating and confirming Justices to the U.S. Supreme Court seem to be following a norm of prior judicial experience-one that makes previous service on the (federal) bench a near prerequisite for office. Largely as a result of this norm, today's Court, while growing more and more diverse on some dimensions, is becoming less and less so on the dimension of career diversity. We argue that all norms that cut against diversity are problematic because they reduce the ability of the decision-making group (the Supreme Court not excepted) to perform its tasks. We further argue that the norm of prior judicial experience is particularly troublesome for two reasons. First, since virtually all analyses show career path to be an important factor in explaining judicial choices-from the votes Justices cast to their respect for stare decisis-the homogeneity induced by the norm suggests that the current Court is not making optimal choices. Second, since women and people of color are less likely than White men to hold positions that are now, under the norm of prior judicial experience, steppingstones to the bench, the norm is also working to limit diversity on dimensions other than career path. This Article draws on multiple sources, ranging from an original database that houses a wealth of information on the occupational backgrounds of the Court's Justices to the writings of leading contemporary thinkers. From these sources, we extract a clear and significant policy implication: Because of problems associated with a perpetuation of the norm of prior judicial experience, we argue that the Senate, the president, and other key players in the confirmation process should give greater attention to the nominees' career experiences. But such attention ought not come in the form of reserving the next two, three, or four vacancies for nominees hailing directly from private practice, legislatures, the cabinet, and so on. Rather, it should come about by taking into account the career experiences of Justices remaining on the Court and then working to avoid excessive duplication.
Journal Article
Understanding Health Disparities: The Role of Race and Socioeconomic Status in Children's Health
Objectives. We sought to determine whether childhood health disparities are best understood as effects of race, socioeconomic status (SES), or synergistic effects of the two.
Methods. Data from the National Health Interview Survey 1994 of US children aged 0 to 18 years (n=33911) were used. SES was measured as parental education. Child health measures included overall health, limitations, and chronic and acute childhood conditions.
Results. For overall health, activity and school limitations, and chronic circulatory conditions, the likelihood of poor outcomes increased as parental education decreased. These relationships were stronger among White and Black children, and weaker or nonexistent among Hispanic and Asian children. However, Hispanic and Asian children exhibited an opposite relationship for acute respiratory illness, whereby children with more educated parents had higher rates of illness.
Conclusions. The traditional finding of fewer years of parent education being associated with poorer health in offspring is most prominent among White and Black children and least evident among Hispanic and Asian children. These findings suggest that lifestyle characteristics (e.g., cultural norms for health behaviors) of low-SES Hispanic and Asian children may buffer them from health problems. Future interventions that seek to bolster these characteristics among other low-SES children may be important for reducing childhood health disparities.
Journal Article
Does the U.S. Constitution Need an Equal Rights Amendment?
For over 3 decades, those engaged in the battle over the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), along with many scholarly commentators, have argued that ratification of the amendment will lead U.S. courts (1) to elevate the standard of law they now use to adjudicate claims of sex discrimination, which, in turn, could lead them (2) to find in favor of parties claiming a denial of their rights. We investigate both possibilities via an examination of constitutional sex discrimination litigation in the 50 states—over a third of which have adopted ERAs. Employing methods especially developed for this investigation, we find no direct effect of the ERA on case outcomes. But we do identify an indirect effect: the presence of an ERA significantly increases the likelihood of a court applying a higher standard of law, which in turn significantly increases the likelihood of a decision favoring the equality claim.
Journal Article