1.. HARD CASES 5. Legal Rights A. Legislation . . . We might therefore do well to consider how a philosophical judge might develop, in appropriate cases, theories of what legislative purpose and legal principles require. We shall find that he would construct these theories in the same manner as a philosophical referee would construct the character of a game. I have invented, for this purpose, a lawyer of superhuman skill, learning, patience and acumen, whom I shall call Hercules. I suppose that Hercules is a judge in some representative American jurisdiction. I assume that he accepts the main uncontroversial constitutive and regulative rules of the law in his jurisdiction. He accepts, that is, that statutes have the general power to create and extinguish legal rights, and that judges have the general duty to follow earlier decisions of their court or higher courts whose rationale, as l

Taking Rights Seriously

Scholars of culture, humanities and social sciences have increasingly come to an appreciation of the importance of the legal domain in social life, while critically engaged socio-legal scholars around the world have taken up the task of understanding "Law's Empire" in all of its cultural, political, and economic dimensions. The questions arising from these intersections, and addressing imperialisms past and present forms the subject matter of a special symposium issue of Social Identities under the editorship of Griffith University's Rob McQueen, and UBC's Wes Pue and with contributions from McQueen, Ian Duncanson, Renisa Mawani, David Williams, Emma Cunliffe, Chidi Oguamanam, W. Wesley Pue, Fatou Camara, and Dianne Kirkby. This paper introduces the volume, forthcoming in late 2007. The central problematique of this issue has previously been explored through the 2005 Law's Empire conference, an informal but vibrant postcolonial legal studies network.

Law's Empire

Economic conditions shape election outcomes in the world's democracies. Good times keep parties in office, bad times cast them out. This proposition is robust, as the voluminous body of research reviewed here demonstrates. The strong findings at the macro level are founded on the economic voter, who holds the government responsible for economic performance, rewarding or punishing it at the ballot box. Although voters do not look exclusively at economic issues, they generally weigh those more heavily than any others, regardless of the democracy they vote in.

Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes

This paper develops a game-theoretic approach to the problem of political officials' respect for political and economic rights of citizens. It models the policing of rights as a coordination problem among citizens, but one with asymmetries difficult to resolve in a decentralized manner. The paper shows that democratic stability depends on a self-enforcing equilibrium: It must be in the interests of political officials to respect democracy's limits on their behavior. The concept of self-enforcing limits on the state illuminates a diverse set of problems and thus serves as a potential basis for integrating the literature. The framework is applied to a range of topics, such as democratic stability, plural societies, and elite pacts. The paper also applies its lessons to the case of the Glorious Revolution in seventeenth-century England.

The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of the Law

About the Editors. Acknowledgments. Small Groups: An Overview. Part 1. Group Composition. Introduction. Reading 1. The Contribution of Influence and Selection to Adolescent Peer Group Homogeneity: The Case of Adolescent Cigarette Smoking. Ennett & Bauman. Reading 2. Some Effects of Proportions on Group Life: Skewed Sex Ratios and Responses to Token Women. Kanter . Reading 3 Effects of Crew Composition on Crew Performance: Does the Whole Equal the Sum of Its Parts? Tziner & Eden. Part 2. Group Structure. Introduction. Reading 4. Status, Expectations, and Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review and Test of the Theory. Driskell & Mullen. Reading 5. Asymmetries in Attachments to Groups and to Their Members: Distinguishing Between Common-Identity and Common-Bond Groups. Prentice, Miller, & Lightdale. Reading 6. The "Friendly" Poker Game: A Study of an Ephemeral Role. Zurcher. Part 3. Conflict in Groups. Introduction. Reading 7. Effects of Group Identity on Resource Use in a Simulated Commons Dilemma. Kramer & Brewer. Reading 8. Status, Ideology, and Integrative Complexity on the U.S. Supreme Court: Rethinking the Politics of Political Decision Making. Gruenfeld. Reading 9. Being Better by Being Right: Subjective Group Dynamics and Derogation of In-Group Deviants When Generic Norms Are Undermined. Marques, Abrams, & Serodio. Reading 10. Does Power Corrupt? Kipnis. Part 4. Group Performance. General Introduction. A. Decision Making. Introduction. Reading 11. Collective Induction. Laughlin & Shippy. Reading 12. Social Transition Schemes: Charting the Group's Road to Agreement. Kerr. Reading 13. Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. Stasser & Titus. Reading 14. Threat, Cohesion, and Group Effectiveness: Testing a Social Identity Maintenance Perspective on Groupthink. Turner, Pratkanis, Probasco, & Leve. Reading 15. The Effects of Repeated Expressions on Attitude Polarization during Group Discussions. Brauer, Judd, & Gliner. B. Productivity. Introduction. Reading 16. Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. Latane, Williams, & Harkins. Reading 17. Impact of Group Goals, Task Component Complexity, Effort, and Planning on Group Performance. Weingart. Reading 18. Transactive Memory: Learning Who Knows What in Work Groups and Organizations. Moreland. C. Leadership. Introduction. Reading 19. Self-Monitoring and Trait-Based Variance in Leadership: An Investigation of Leader Flexibility across Multiple Group Situations. Zaccaro, Foti, & Kenny. Reading 20. The Contingency Model: A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. Fiedler. Reading 21. Self-Categorization and Leadership: Effects of Group Prototypicality and Leader Stereotypicality. Hains, Hogg, & Duck.. Reading 22. The Romance of Leadership. Meindl, Ehrlich, & Dukerich. Part 5. Group Ecology. Introduction. Reading 23. Coming Out in the Age of the Internet: Identity "Demarginalization" Through Virtual Group Participation. McKenna & Bargh. Reading 24. Stability, Bistability, and Instability in Small Group Influence Patterns. Arrow. Reading 25. Socialization in Organizations and Work Groups. Moreland & Levine. Reading 26. Beyond Task and Maintenance: Defining External Functions in Groups. Ancona & Caldwell

Small Groups: Key Readings

This book, authored by two leading scholars of the Supreme Court and its policy making, systematically presents and validates the use of the attitudinal model to explain and predict Supreme Court decision making. In the process, it critiques the two major alternative models of Supreme Court decision making and their major variants: the legal and rational choice. Using the US Supreme Court Data Base, the justices' private papers, and other sources of information, the book analyzes the appointment process, certiorari, the decision on the merits, opinion assignments, and the formation of opinion coalitions. The book will be the definitive presentation of the attitudinal model as well as an authoritative critique of the legal and rational choice models. The book thoroughly reflects research done since the 1993 publication of its predecessor, as well as decisions and developments in the Supreme Court, including the momentous decision of Bush v. Gore.

/pdf/the-supreme-court-and-the-attitudinal-model-revisited-3t1eihq2s4.pdf

The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited

Preface 1. Introduction: Supreme Court policy making 2. Models of decision making 3. A political history of the Supreme Court 4. Staffing the Court 5. Getting into court 6. The decision on the merits process 7. Opinion assignment and opinion coalitions 8. The Supreme Court and constitutional democracy 9. The impact of judicial decisions 10. Conclusion Appendix Index.

The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model

It is commonly assumed that Supreme Court justices' votes largely reflect their attitudes, values, or personal policy preferences. Nevertheless, this assumption has never been adequately tested with independent measures of the ideological values of justices, that is, measures not taken from their votes on the Court. Using content analytic techniques, we derive independent and reliable measures of the values of all Supreme Court justices from Earl Warren to Anthony Kennedy. These values correlate highly with the votes of the justices, providing strong support for the attitudinal model.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0003055400083374

Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices

The concept of issue salience has figured prominently in many studies of American political life. Long lines of research have taught us that both citizens and political elites may respond differently to issues that are salient to them than to those that are not. Yet analysts making such claims about elite actors face a fundamental problem that their counterparts in mass behavior do not: they cannot survey, say, members of the Supreme Court to ascertain those cases that are especially salient to the justices. Rather, scholars must rely on surrogates for issue salience-surrogates that are fraught with problems and that have led to disparate research results. Accordingly, we offer an alternative approach to measure issue salience for elite actors: the coverage the media affords to a given issue. We argue that this approach has substantial benefits over those employed in the past. Most notably, it provides a reproducible, valid, and transportable method of assessing whether the particular actors under investigation view an issue as salient or not. In making the case for our measure we focus on Supreme Court justices but we are sanguine about its applicability to other political actors

Jeffrey A. Segal

Papers

The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited

The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model

Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices

Measuring Issue Salience

Supreme Court decision making