scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Judicial opinion

About: Judicial opinion is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5300 publications have been published within this topic receiving 64803 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that judicial review fails in any significant sense to control central government, due to the characteristics of the civil service which, in the absence of any significant legal training as a condition of employment, tend not to be aware of the significance of administrative law principles.
Abstract: Administrative law is traditionally said to be concerned with the ‘control of government’, and judicial review of administrative action is said to be the primary mechanism of ‘control’. It is argued that judicial review fails in any significant sense to control central government. Explanations for this include the ability of the executive, acting through the legislature it controls, to reverse or nullify judicial decisions: the characteristics of the civil service which, in the absence of any significant legal training as a condition of employment, tend not to be aware of the significance of administrative law principles; and the imprecision of those principles, which make them inadequate as a guide to determine administrative processes. If administrative lawyers do in fact seek to establish control over central government, some at least of those problems must be faced, perhaps by the creation of a body of principles of administration.

16 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate case selection and judicial decision-making in French labor courts and show that the ideological composition of the court indirectly impacts the settlement behavior of the parties but has no influence on the decision made in court.
Abstract: Using a database on French labor courts between 1998 and 2012, we investigate case selection and judicial decision-making. In France, judges are elected at the labor court level on lists proposed by unions, and litigants can first try to settle their case before the judicial hearing. We show that the ideological composition of the court indirectly impacts the settlement behavior of the parties but has no influence on the decision made in court. In addition, parties have self-fulfilling behavior and adapt to institutional rules. When they anticipate long judicial procedures at court, they settle more frequently and only require judicial hearings for complex cases. The duration to decide these complex cases is longer, explaining why they observe (and build their anticipation on) long case duration. Our empirical strategy uses probit, ordered probit and triprobit estimations to control for case selection.

16 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The role of education research in civil rights litigation was discussed in this article, drawing on historical roots established in Brown v. Board of Education 1954 and exploring recent challenges in cases such as Grutter v. Bollinger 2003.
Abstract: This commentary was designed to accompany a series of articles in Educational Researcher, vol. 35, no. 1, a theme issue entitled “Moving Beyond Gratz and Grutter—The Next Generation of Research.” The author discusses the role of education research in civil rights litigation, drawing on historical roots established in Brown v. Board of Education 1954 and exploring recent challenges in cases such as Grutter v. Bollinger 2003. He highlights the roles of scientific research in judicial decision making, which have included informing doctrine and bolstering the rhetorical strength of judicial opinions. Because of the courts’ open-ended use of scientific research, the author concludes that education research can play a valuable role in informing civil rights disputes and policy debates

16 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The Common Law is one of the most influential studies of the common law tradition; it has shaped the views of American legal scholars for several generations as discussed by the authors, and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. was a dominant figure in American jurisprudence.
Abstract: Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. is one of the dominant figures in American jurisprudence. As a scholar, he wrote prolifically about legal theory and legal history. His book The Common Law is one of the most influential studies of the common law tradition; it has shaped the views of American legal scholars for several generations. In addition, Holmes spent nearly forty years as a judge-first as a justice on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and later as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. On the bench, Holmes was a formidable presence influencing the development of American law. His judicial opinions are both numerous and memorable. More than fifty years after his death, casebooks still include many of his opinions and legal periodicals frequently contain analyses of his judicial philosophy.' Indeed, Holmes is so central to the American legal tradition that understanding what Holmes thought about law is an important step in understanding one's own thoughts on legal theory.

16 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose the R if C > B + P paradigm, which states that if a remedy requires extensive policy and budgetary choices, the court will only make them for a constitutional violation which is proportionately - quantitatively or qualitatively - extensive.
Abstract: There is no rights apartheid. Socioeconomic rights are subject to enforcement in the same manner as civil rights. If a remedy requires extensive - quantitatively and qualitatively - policy and budgetary choices, the court will only make them for a constitutional violation which is proportionately - quantitatively or qualitatively - extensive. This dynamic may be described algebraically as R if C > B + P. The predictive utility of this paradigm is somewhat reduced by the difficulty of defining with precision the contextual aspects of these variables - the historical, political, and moral forces at work. As a rough approximation of judicial decisions regarding remedies, this paradigm suggests that Treatment Action Campaign and Others v. Minister of Health and Others will be the first socioeconomic case to break down the perceived rights apartheid. The article concludes, however, that the better use of this paradigm may be as an instrument for the design of litigation regarding socioeconomic rights.

16 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
International law
52K papers, 556.6K citations
81% related
Human rights
98.9K papers, 1.1M citations
79% related
Legitimacy
26.1K papers, 565.9K citations
78% related
Prison
25.1K papers, 470.4K citations
78% related
Democracy
108.6K papers, 2.3M citations
75% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
202314
202242
202196
2020160
2019174
2018176