scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "Supreme Court Decisions published in 1979"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors test the widely assumed proposition that the original support for a decision at the Supreme Court level, the greater the subsequent compliance with that decision by the lower courts.
Abstract: This article tests the widely assumed proposition that the greater the original support for a decision at the Supreme Court level, the greater the subsequent compliance with that decision by the lower courts. Five indicators of support were used in the analysis-size of the voting majority, size of the opinion majority, number of dissenting justices, number of dissenting opinions, and author of the majority opinion. Indexes of compliance, evasion, and discord based on Shepard's Citations listings of lower court reactions to 1961-1963 Supreme Court decisions from 1963 to 1967 were used as measures of lower court responses to Supreme Court decisions. The analysis failed to support any of the hypothesized relationships.

60 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In contrast to the large and growing literature on Supreme Court decision-making in cases decided with full opinions, relatively little has been written about the prior court decisions to grant or deny review on petitions for certiorari as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: IN CONTRAST TO the large and growing literature on Supreme Court decision-making in cases decided with full opinions, relatively little has been written about the prior court decisions to grant or deny review on petitions for certiorari. Such a shortcoming may be due in part to the difficulty in obtaining the relevant empirical facts about the process of decision-making which the Supreme Court's "doctrine of secrecy" produces. This lack of attention should not, however, be allowed to obscure the obvious policy significance of these decisions. In the past about 75 percent of all cases that went to oral argument reached the Supreme Court through petitions for certiorari.' Certiorari decisions are thus a crucial part of the gatekeeping processes by which the justices determine which issues will be the subjects of Court output. The justices on the Supreme Court have done little to aid scholars who seek to understand the process. Several studies have suggested that the official court criteria, contained in Rule 19, shed little light

55 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors attempted to ascertain what factors have motivated the Burger Court Justices in their policy choices, and they found that none of their hypothesized influences explain the access choices of the Court as a whole.
Abstract: The issues of access to the federal courts and the policy implications of recent Supreme Court decisions have been the subject of much taxonomic and doctrinal analysis, particularly in light of the pattern of retrenchment and restriction that the Burger Court has displayed. This analysis attempts to ascertain what factors have motivated the Burger Court Justices in their policy choices. Through the use of cumulative scaling we find that none of our hypothesized influences explain the access choices of the Court as a whole. The Justices, rather, march to the beat of individualized drums-a varying admixture of administrative-legal influences, political attitudes, and/or an overall access attitude. Each Justice's admixture is specified.

20 citations


Book
01 May 1979
TL;DR: Leslie Friedman Goldstein this paper examines the ways in which the U.S. Supreme Court initiates and responds to social change using a wide variety of cases involving women's rights.
Abstract: Using a wide variety of cases involving women s rights, Leslie Friedman Goldstein examines the ways in which the U.S. Supreme Court initiates and responds to social change. This edition covers all major Supreme Court decisions that affect gender equity and reproductive rights through May 1987."

16 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
23 Nov 1979-JAMA
TL;DR: The Court's determination of the standard of proof required by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for an involuntary commitment to a state mental hospital is wrapped in a comprehensive delineation of rights and duties.
Abstract: A unanimous opinion of the Supreme Court is an unusual phenomenon today, when it seems that almost every other decision of that august court is determined by a single vote. Furthermore, it is encouraging to read the opinion written by Chief Justice Warren Burger in the case of Addington vs Texas. The reader must appreciate the wisdom and sensitivity disclosed by the careful analysis in that opinion, which deals with the legal problems inherent in the civil commitment of the mentally ill.The Court's determination of the standard of proof required by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for an involuntary commitment to a state mental hospital is wrapped in a comprehensive delineation of rights and duties. The main argument centered on use of the same standard of proof required in criminal actions, ie, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, as opposed to the more moderate standard of clear

11 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the impact of five Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions on five state agencies was evaluated and it was shown that the decision to initiate a search depended upon the agency's interpretation of the judicial decision as adverse and the extent of the search was related to the enforcement possibilities.
Abstract: This article reports on research evaluating the impact of five Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions on five Pennsylvania state agencies. Rational choice theory is used to explain several different responses to the judicial decisions: (1) initiating a search for more information, (2) conducting an extensive search, and (3) complying with the court decision and degree of compliance. The analysis demonstrates that the decision to initiate a search depended upon the agency's interpretation of the judicial decision as adverse. The extent of the search was related to the enforcement possibilities. The degree of compliance differed according to whether the agency viewed the decision as adverse and what resources the agency had at its disposal. In general, all of the agencies failed to comply actively with the state court decisions.

10 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the Supreme Court decisions that pertain to the status of advertising under the First Amendment's freedom of speech provision and conclude that instead of giving the national advertiser greater freedom, the Court may have reduced his freedom by expecting more legitimate commercial information.
Abstract: This article is an examination of the Supreme Court decisions that pertain to the status of advertising under the First Amendment's freedom of speech provision. The author asks to what extent national advertising—commercial communication from producers to consumers promoting the producers' brands—is constitutionally protected, and concludes that instead of giving the national advertiser greater freedom, the Court may have reduced his freedom by expecting more legitimate commercial information. In Virginia Pharmacy the Court made it clear that protection did not preclude regulation to insure that “the stream of commercial information flow(s) cleanly as well as freely.”

6 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors suggest the magnitude of underutilization of our housing space and discuss the federal and local policies which encourage overconsumption and discourage voluntary redistribution, and some pertinent recent Supreme Court decisions are discussed.
Abstract: The nature of the housing problem in the United States has changed over the years while the posed solutions have not. Today the U.S. has both a surplus of housing and a shortage–the housing space is not effectively distributed. This article suggests the magnitude of underutilization of our housing space and discusses the federal and local policies which encourage over-consumption and discourage voluntary redistribution. Some pertinent recent Supreme Court decisions are discussed.

5 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A close examination of early and modern American constitutional interpretation reveals that there has been an essential change in the manner in which the Constitution is interpreted as discussed by the authors, and the reasons for this change can be found in the early writings of Woodrow Wilson.
Abstract: A close examination of early and modern American constitutional interpretation reveals that there has been an essential change in the manner in which the Constitution is interpreted. When that comparison takes the form of a comparison between very early Supreme Court decisions and very recent ones the difference is relatively clear--at least that there is a difference. To some extent, what some of the differences are is observable. For instance, the overt balancing of interests (those of state and individual) in modern civil liberties cases is quite different from the character of earlier Supreme Court decisions. On the other hand, an examination of the history of the Supreme Court does not immediately reveal when, why, and through whom this change occurred; nor is the precise character of the change readily ascertainable. This article will attempt to discover the character of that change, and the reasons for it, through an analysis of an important American political thinker and actor: Woodrow Wilson. Wilson's writings are peculiarly useful, because in some measure the process of change seems to have occurred within his thought. He cannot be said to be simply traditional or simply modern in his approach, even at any one point in his development. But he seems to have started his political writing with a generally traditional approach to constitutional interpretation (i.e., one similar to the Founders') and to have closed it with a generally modern approach. The character of the change itself, and the reasons for the change, then, will be the central focus of this article. Wilson's early position regarding American government is clearly, forcefully, and attractively portrayed in a book which still remains, despite his subsequent alterations, the most lasting statement of his political views: Congressional Government.' This outgrowth of his doctoral thesis (and an earlier undergraduate thesis), published in 1885, describes Wilson's early views of the Constitution.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The attempt is made to demonstrate that the Supreme Court in deciding the Roe v. Wade case should not have decided an abortion case when it did and that the opinion was almost destined to be bad in that the Court could find no persuasive rationale in the pre-Roe cases for each of the points in its decision.
Abstract: The attempt is made in this discussion to demonstrate that the Supreme Court in deciding the Roe v. Wade case should not have decided an abortion case when it did and that the opinion was almost destined to be bad in that the Court could find no persuasive rationale in the pre-Roe cases for each of the points in its decision. In 1973 political forces were actively debating abortion. Abortions had been prohibited by most states, except to save a woman's life, since the 19th century. In the 5 years immediately preceding Roe, 13 states had revised their statutes to resemble the Model Penal Code's provisions, which permitted abortions if the pregnancy threatened the woman's life, if it would gravely impair her physical or mental health, if it resulted from rape or incest, or if the child would be born with grave physical or mental defects. 4 states had removed all restrictions on the permissible reasons for seeking an abortion before a pregnancy passed specified lengths. In short, in many states the political process had yet to decide on abortion, but Roe's rejection of Texas's statute voided almost every other state's statutes as well. Between 1970 and 1972, a flurry of constitutional challenges hit the courts. 3 years was hardly sufficient time for the judicial system to evolve sound analysis for such an emotionally charged issue as abortion. The Court could justifiably have allowed the dispute to simmer longer in the lower courts. There is some indication that a sounder case law might evolved if given time, but that was prevented by Roe. The Court could not find a rationale in 1973, but it decided anyway, suggesting a legislative rather than a judicial process. Language: en