Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
239
result(s) for
"Political questions and judicial power -- United States"
Sort by:
The puzzle of judicial behavior (analytical perspectives on politics)
From local trial courts to the United States Supreme Court, judges' decisions affect the fates of individual litigants and the fate of the nation as a whole. Scholars have long discussed and debated explanations of judicial behavior. This book examines the major issues in the debates over how best to understand judicial behavior and assesses what we actually know about how judges decide cases. It concludes that we are far from understanding why judges choose the positions they take in court.
Lawrence Baum considers three issues in examining judicial behavior. First, the author considers the balance between the judges' interest in the outcome of particular cases and their interest in other goals such as personal popularity and lighter workloads. Second, Baum considers the relative importance of good law and good policy as bases for judges' choices. Finally Baum looks at the extent to which judges act strategically, choosing their own positions after taking into account the positions that their fellow judges and other policy makers might adopt. Baum argues that the evidence on each of these issues is inconclusive and that there remains considerable room for debate about the sources of judges' decisions. Baum concludes that this lack of resolution is not the result of weaknesses in the scholarship but from the difficulty in explaining human behavior. He makes a plea for diversity in research.
This book will be of interest to political scientists and scholars in law and courts as well as attorneys who are interested in understanding judges as decision makers and who want to understand what we can learn from scholarly research about judicial behavior.
Lawrence Baum is Professor of Political Science, Ohio State University.
eBook
Justice and empathy : toward a constitutional ideal
\"An impassioned argument for the role of courts as a moral and social agent for change and protecting the vulnerable...The Supreme Court long considered its highest mission to be the protection of individual liberty from intrusion by government, but the court shifted its focus to social and economic equality. Constitutional scholar Robert A. Burt explores this shift and its implications, especially for the legal protection of the vulnerable. Crucial to Burt's perspective is his unconventional view of the role of judges--not simply to decide disputes, but to promote a respectful dialogue leading to a genuine understanding between parties.\" -- Publisher's website.
Book
The constrained court
How do Supreme Court justices decide their cases? Do they follow their policy preferences? Or are they constrained by the law and by other political actors? The Constrained Court combines new theoretical insights and extensive data analysis to show that law and politics together shape the behavior of justices on the Supreme Court.
Michael Bailey and Forrest Maltzman show how two types of constraints have influenced the decision making of the modern Court. First, Bailey and Maltzman document that important legal doctrines, such as respect for precedents, have influenced every justice since 1950. The authors find considerable variation in how these doctrines affect each justice, variation due in part to the differing experiences justices have brought to the bench. Second, Bailey and Maltzman show that justices are constrained by political factors. Justices are not isolated from what happens in the legislative and executive branches, and instead respond in predictable ways to changes in the preferences of Congress and the president.
The Constrained Court shatters the myth that justices are unconstrained actors who pursue their personal policy preferences at all costs. By showing how law and politics interact in the construction of American law, this book sheds new light on the unique role that the Supreme Court plays in the constitutional order.
eBook
The Politics of Justice
First Published in 2015. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an Informa company.
eBook
Battle over the Bench
Who gets seated on the lower federal courts and why? Why are some nominees confirmed easily while others travel a long, hard road to confirmation? What role do senators and interest groups play in determining who will become a federal judge? The lower federal courts have increasingly become the final arbiters of the important political and social issues of the day. As a result, who gets seated on the bench has become a major political issue. InBattle over the Bench,Amy Steigerwalt argues that the key to understanding the dynamics of the lower court confirmation process is to examine the process itself. She offers a new analytic framework for understanding when nominations become contested, and shows when and how key actors can influence the fate of nominations and ultimately determine who will become a federal judge.
Given the increasing salience of lower court decisions, it is not surprising that interest groups and partisan agendas play an important role. Steigerwalt inventories the means by which senators push through or block nominations, and why interest groups decide to support or oppose certain nominations. The politics of judicial confirmations do not end there, however. Steigerwalt also reveals how many nominees are blocked for private political reasons that have nothing to do with ideology, while senators may use their support for or opposition to nominees as bargaining chips to garner votes for their positions on unrelated issues. Battle over the Bench showcases the complex and, at times, hidden motivations driving the staffing of the federal bench.
eBook
Principled judicial restraint : a case against activism
Many Americans believe that judicial activism is standard procedure on the modern Supreme Court. Political scientist Jerold Waltman asserts that justices routinely call for restraint when they disagree with specific majority decisions, but they then blithely abandon that position when it suits their purposes. Such calls for restraint are therefore unprincipled. In response, many people have argued that the Court should adopt a more restrained posture across the board, usually appealing to one of two ideas: the inherently undemocratic character of the Supreme Court or the likelihood that the Court is damaging its legitimacy by wading into so many controversial political issues. This book contends that what is sorely needed is a revised--actually a resurrected--constitutional theory that will delegitimize activism, or at least most of it, whether of the liberal or conservative variety. -- Back cover.
Book
