Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions
by
Owens, B. Robert
, Merriman, Ben
in
Action
/ Appeals
/ Behavior
/ Courts of appeals
/ Creative ability
/ Creativity
/ Federal court decisions
/ Frame analysis
/ Habits
/ Judges
/ Judges & magistrates
/ Judicial process
/ Law
/ Philosophy of the Social Sciences
/ Political asylum
/ Pragmatism
/ Preferences
/ Questions
/ Rational choice
/ Social environment
/ Social Sciences
/ Social work
/ Sociology
2021
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions
by
Owens, B. Robert
, Merriman, Ben
in
Action
/ Appeals
/ Behavior
/ Courts of appeals
/ Creative ability
/ Creativity
/ Federal court decisions
/ Frame analysis
/ Habits
/ Judges
/ Judges & magistrates
/ Judicial process
/ Law
/ Philosophy of the Social Sciences
/ Political asylum
/ Pragmatism
/ Preferences
/ Questions
/ Rational choice
/ Social environment
/ Social Sciences
/ Social work
/ Sociology
2021
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions
by
Owens, B. Robert
, Merriman, Ben
in
Action
/ Appeals
/ Behavior
/ Courts of appeals
/ Creative ability
/ Creativity
/ Federal court decisions
/ Frame analysis
/ Habits
/ Judges
/ Judges & magistrates
/ Judicial process
/ Law
/ Philosophy of the Social Sciences
/ Political asylum
/ Pragmatism
/ Preferences
/ Questions
/ Rational choice
/ Social environment
/ Social Sciences
/ Social work
/ Sociology
2021
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions
Journal Article
Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions
2021
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The dominant social scientific approach to studying judicial behavior treats judges as strategic actors pursuing their political preferences under institutional constraint. The intellectual roots of this rational choice approach are in American law’s long but sporadic engagement with pragmatist ideas. This article challenges that approach: a fully pragmatist account of judicial action provides a better description of the intellectual and social work of judging, and better explains how judges reach a decision in difficult cases that most affect the development of law and its relationship to society. The article argues that the foundational intellectual problem for appellate judges is how to define the legal questions presented in a case. Definitions of legal questions arise from the interplay of habitual and creative action in the local social context of an appeals court. Professional and local interpretive habits and legal forms ordinarily do a great deal to define the key questions, which are not strictly determined when a case comes before a court. Unscripted small group interactions at oral arguments also figure in question definition; oral arguments are most important in the rare but legally important cases where habitual practices alone are insufficient to delimit the legal question judges must answer. Supported by extensive interviews with federal appeals judges and clerks, the article illustrates judges’ creative, interactional efforts to define an answerable question in a major asylum case decided in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Building from this case, the article describes the factors that shape judicial question definition, and describes the conditions when creative judicial action is likely to be most prominent.
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.