Judicial opinion

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

On law, politics, and judicialization

Abstract: 1. Law, Courts, and Social Science 2. Judicial Law-making and Precedent 3. Constitutional Judicial Review 4. Testing, Comparison, Prediction 5. Private Law and Governance 6. Abstract Review and Judicial Law-making

Political Parties, Public Opinion, and State Policy in the United States

Abstract: When comparing states in the United States, one finds little correlation between state opinion and party control of the state legislature or between party control and state policy. Although these low correlations seeming to indicate that partisan politics is irrelevant to the representation process, the opposite is true. State opinion influences the ideological positions of state parties, and parties' responsiveness to state opinion helps to determine their electoral success. Moreover, parties move toward the center once in office. For these reasons, state electoral politics is largely responsible for the correlation between state opinion and state policy.

Democratic Theory and Public Opinion

Abstract: Public opinion research has sometimes been Mr. Berelson's interest in this topic has deneglectful of both the political content of its veloped out of, and is expressed in, the Elmira data and the extent to which it could vitalize study of opinion formation during the Presithe theory of democratic politics. dential campaign of 1948. In the preparation In this, his Presidential Address before the of this paper, he has benefited from discussions seventh annual convention of the American with Edward Shils, his former colleague at the Association for Public Opinion Research, BerUniversity of Chicago, and from his reading nard Berelson restates the fundamental requireof Mr. Shils' manuscript on Consensus and ments of a democratic politic and points out Liberty: The Social and Psychological Condihow opinion research can help a democracy tions of Political Democracy. to know itself, evaluate its achievements, and At present, Mr. Berelson is Director of the bring its practices more nearly in accord with Behavioral Sciences Division of the Ford Founits own fundamental ideals. dation.

Judicial Behavior under Political Constraints: Evidence from the European Court of Justice

Abstract: The actual impact of judicial decisions often depends on the behavior of executive and legislative bodies that implement the rulings Consequently, when a court hears a case involving the interests of those controlling the executive and legislative institutions, those interests can threaten to obstruct the court's intended outcome In this paper, we evaluate whether and to what extent such constraints shape judicial rulings Specifically, we examine how threats of noncompliance and legislative override influence decisions by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) Based on a statistical analysis of a novel dataset of ECJ rulings, we find that the preferences of member-state governments—whose interests are central to threats of noncompliance and override—have a systematic and substantively important impact on ECJ decisions

Understandings of justice: Institutional legitimacy, procedural justice, and political tolerance.

Abstract: This research examines the linkages among institutional legitimacy, perceptions of procedural justice, and voluntary compliance with unpopular institutional decisions within the context of political intolerance and repression. Several questions are addressed, including: To what degree do judicial decisions contribute to the acceptance of unpopular political decisions? Do court decisions have a greater power to legitimize than the decisions of other political institutions? Are courts perceived as more procedurally fair than other political institutions? Do perceptions of procedural fairness-be it in a court or legislative institution-contribute to the efficacy of institutional decisions? The basic hypothesis of this research is that to the extent that an institution employs fair decisionmaking procedures, it is viewed as legitimate and citizens are more likely to comply with its decisions, even when they are unpopular. Based on an analysis of national survey data, I conclude that, although perceptions of institutional procedure have little impact on compliance, institutional legitimacy does seem to have some effect. The United States Supreme Court in particular seems to have some ability to elicit acceptance of public policies that are unpopular with the mass public. This effect is greatest among opinion leaders. I conclude with some observations about how these findings fit with the growing literature on procedural justice and with some thoughts about the implications of the findings for the protection of democratic liberty.