Showing papers on "Judicial opinion published in 1969"

The Party Variable in Judges' Voting: Conceptual Notes and a Case Study*

Abstract: Since the writings of the judicial realists in the 1920's and 1930's almost all social scientists have accepted the concept that the judicial process is basically political. One line of reasoning points out that judges inevitably are policy makers because of their functions, such as constitutional and statutory interpretation. Politics is conflict among interests or values or demands, and any activity, including judicial decisions, which advantages one interest as opposed to others is political activity. Since judges decide cases involving interest conflicts, theirs is “interest activity not as a matter of choice but of function.” Robert H. Jackson made the point cogently when he argued that the “Supreme Court has, from the very nature of its functions, been deep in power politics …” Of the power of judicial review, he said, “The ultimate function of the Supreme Court is nothing less than the arbitration between fundamental and ever-present rival forces or trends in our organized society.” Although these remarks were addressed to the Supreme Court, they are true to a substantial degree of judicial power throughout the American system. Many of the conflicts adjudicated by the judiciary advance some interests or values and disadvantage others.At the same time that the judicial function has been recognized as political in its consequences, the process of judicial decision making has come to be viewed as involving wide opportunities for discretion by the judges. The mechanical theory of judging, enunciated most clearly by the late Justice Owen Roberts, is now generally in disrepute, and realists prefer to cite Charles Evans Hughes who stated “We are under the Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.”

The Prosecutor: An Inquiry into the Exercise of Discretion

Abstract: Every day decisions made by prosecutors, before trial takes place, critically affect the rights of citizens; yet these decisions remain a grey area in the administration of criminal justice. In fact, there are considerable and important differences between what the prosecutor does and what the legal literature and judicial decisions say he should do. Very little is known about the powers wielded by prosecutors and the factors which influence their exercise of discretion. This inquiry focuses on the decision-making role of the prosecutor in pre-trial determinations. Professor Grosman describes and analyses the prosecutor's informal relations with the police and defence lawyers, and the significance these relationships have for the accused and for the fair administration of justice. Other areas examined include the decision to begin prosecution, the negotiated guilty plea, and the prosecutor's administrative bias. The study concludes with recommendations for judicial and legislative reform. Professor Grosman has added a preface to this edition outlining the changes that have occurred in recent years. A lucid and revealing description of the prosecutor's attitudes to criminal prosecution and its operation, this study contributes important insights valuable to lawyers and all those concerned with the administration of justice, and will be of interest to everyone concerned with social problems.

A Critical Guide to Marbury v. Madison

Abstract: The concept of judicial review of the constitutionality of state and federal statutes by the Supreme Court is generally rested upon the epic decision in Marbury v. Madison. The controversies which have surrounded the exercise of this power by the Supreme Court require a periodic reexamination of the concept of judicial review at its source, the Marbury opinion. This article proceeds by examining the historical context in which the case arose and analyzes the opinion in terms of various alternative approaches which might have been utilized by Chief Justice Marshall. The specific holding of the case is isolated in contrast to later interpretation given it, and a collection of relevant historical materials is presented to lend insight into the constitutional viewpoints of the period.

Backgrounds, Attitudes and the Voting Behavior of Judges: A Comment on Joel Grossman's Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decisions

Abstract: SHELDON GOLDMAN University of Massackusetts T HE DIALOGUE WITHIN the profession concerning judicial behavior research has generally moved from disapproving polemic to sympathetic indeed constructive criticism. A recent valuable contribution to this dialogue was The Journal of Politics article by Joel B. Grossmanl in which he assessed three judicial decisionmaking models which either expressly or implicitly consider social/ political backgrounds insofar as they are at the root of attitudes and values as variables for judicial decision-making. Since I am responsible for one of the models, I would like to respond to Grossman's points of criticism and cite some evidence which supports ome of the assumptions questioned by Grossman. In so doing, the attempt shall be made to clarify the research problems at issue.

The Length and Plurality of Supreme Court of Canada Decisions

Abstract: Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dube discusses how the length and plurality of judicial opinions emanating from the Supreme Court of Canada are manifestations of the justices' "judicial junctions" as both adjudicators and educators. After a thoughtful look at the history and background of the dual aspect of the judicial role, Her Ladyship responds to critics of the Court's decision-making style by concluding that and complex judgments are the exception rather than the rule, that such judgments are often a necessary step in the development of the law, and that adjustments to the process may only be achieved by cooperation of all members of the legal community.

Disclosure and Production in Sexual Violence Cases: Situating Stinchcombe

Abstract: This article examines the issue of disclosure and the legacy of Stinchcombe through a review of the history of disclosure and production in criminal sexual assault proceedings and an analysis of judicial decisions and legislative enactments in this context. The author presents a feminist analysis of the tension between those representing the rights of accused persons who seek to access a complainant's personal records and the voices of equality-seeking and anti-violence groups that challenge stereotypes about sexual violence against women. The author presents a comprehensive review of the louver court decisions in production applications since the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Mills. The author concludes that while Bill C-46 and Mills are positive developments, a great deal of discretion is left to trial judges to decide on the merits of production on a case-by-case basis, and such decisions are granted much deference by appellate courts. The exercise of discretion may encourage the application of stereotypes about women and sexual violence and is the reason an absolute ban on production is preferred by women's and anti- violence groups.

Can the Knesset Adopt a Constitution which will be the “Supreme Law of the Land”?

Abstract: In an article published in an earlier issue of this Review, the question was raised whether the courts of Israel have finally reached a conclusion on the question of their own power of judicial review of legislative measures passed by the Knesset. It was submitted that the question should be solved by a political rather than a judicial decision. In the present article it is intended to examine a hypothetical constitutional question, namely, can the Knesset, acting within the framework of the existing legal system, adopt or develop a written, rigid Constitution which would become the “supreme law of the land” and which would be effectively protected by the courts?

The Gifted Judge: An Analysis of the Judicial Career of Robert H. Jackson

Abstract: The author undertakes an historical analysis of the judicial achievements of Robert H. Jackson, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1941 until his sudden death in 1954. Justice Jackson's approach to the nature of the judicial function, to judicial review and to the question of extrajudicial activities sheds light on contemporary debate in these areas. Despite being undoubtedly influenced by his place on the "Roosevelt Court," Jackson was a strong individualist, which the author believes accounts for his "maverick" status on the Court Justice Jackson's prominent judicial opinions relating to economic regulation, procedural due process, civil liberties and the separation of powers doctrine reveal how he addressed the inherent tension between judicial review and democracy in the American system of government. The effects of extrajudicial activities are explored with reference to his key role at the Nuremberg Trials, and the appointment of Madam Justice Louise Arbour to serve as Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals.