Showing papers on "Supreme court published in 1987"

The Organizational State: Social Choice in National Policy Domains

Abstract: The Federal Government in the United States is a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." Presidents are elected by popular vote in the nation (filtered through the electoral college), Senators are elected by popular vote in their states, and Representatives are elected by popular vote in their Congressional districts. Cabinet members and agency heads are appointed by the elected president, as are members of the Supreme Court. But this says nothing about politics. Professor Lauman and Knoke have asked, in this book, how policies were made, in the period 1977-1980, in the areas of energy and health. The question is a very different one from the question of how the positions of president and Congress are filled.

Do the Haves Come out Ahead - Winning and Losing in State Supreme Courts, 1870-1970

Abstract: This paper tests the hypothesis that financially and organizationally stronger parties tend to prevail in litigation against weaker parties, either because the normative structure of the American legal system has favored "the haves," or because judges' attitudes do, or because stronger parties have strategic and representational advantages in litigation. The study is based on a sample of 5,904 cases from sixteen state supreme courts, 1870-1970. According to our data, stronger parties, especially larger governmental units, did tend to achieve an advantage over weaker parties, but the advantage generally was rather small. The stronger parties' edge recurs in subsamples for different types of cases, time periods, and types of legal representation. It is attributed in part to the greater litigational capabilities of stronger parties.

Constituent Influence in State Supreme Courts: Conceptual Notes and a Case Study

Abstract: This study examines the low rate of dissent in state supreme courts and argues that this trend might be accounted for, in part, by certain institutional arrangements. Specifically, in state supreme courts where justices are subject to re-election, perceived constituent values may suppress the expression of dissent on highly salient issues for certain types of justices. Instead of voting in accordance with their personal preferences, justices who have very strong ambitions to retain their positions, who perceive themselves to have views inconsistent with those of their constituents, and who find themselves in the minority on issues of high public visibility, may utilize the strategy of not dissenting in order to avoid being singled out for possible electoral sanction. A case study of the Louisiana Supreme Court, combining personal interviews with voting data, supports this proposition.

Psychology and the legal system

Abstract: Psychology and the law - impossible choices Psychologists and the legal system Legality, morality and justice Lawyers - socialization, training and ethics Theories of crime The police and the criminal justice system Crime investigation: eyewitnesses Identification and evaluation of criminal suspects The rights of victims and the rights of the accused Between arrest and trial Competence in the lega1 system The trial process Jury trials I: jury representation and selection Jury trials II: Assumptions and reforms Rape: rapists and victims Insanity and the law The rights of special groups punishment and sentencing The appellate process and the supreme court. (Each chapter concludes with a summary.)

Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA, 1981-1987

Abstract: Veil is the explosive #1 national bestseller that ripped the lid off the inner workings of the CIA. From Watergate to Nixon, from the Supreme Court to the controversial death of comic John Belushi, Bob Woodward is on the leading edge of the events in our nation that make news, make history and make bestsellers!

Public Opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court: FDR's Court-packing Plan

Abstract: I show the intimate connection between the actions of the justices and support for the Supreme Court during one of the most critical periods of U.S. political history, the four months of 1937 during which Franklin D. Roosevelt sought legislation to “pack” the high bench with friendly personnel. Over the period from 3 February through 10 June 1937, the Gallup Poll queried national samples on 18 separate occasions about FDR's plan. These observations constitute the core of my analyses. I demonstrate the crucial influence of judicial behavior and the mass media in shaping public opinion toward the Supreme Court. This research illuminates the dynamics of public support for the justices, contributes to a clearer understanding of an important historical episode, shows the considerable impact of the mass media on public attitudes toward the Court, and adds more evidence on the role of political events in the making of public opinion.

Balancing public trust resources of Mono Lake and Los Angeles' Water Right: An economic approach

Abstract: The contingent valuation method (CVM) is used to quantify the Public Trust values of Mono Lake at alternative lake levels. The dichotomous choice approach to contingent valuation is employed using a logit model. The economic benefit to California residents of preserving Mono Lake is estimated to be $1.5 billion. Purchase of replacement water and power would cost $26.2 million annually. On efficiency grounds, reallocation of water for maintenance of Public Trust values at Mono Lake is warranted. The CVM appears to be a useful methodology to evaluate the balancing and feasibility tests of the expanded Public Trust doctrine suggested by the California Supreme Court.

Senate Confirmation of Supreme Court Justices: Partisan and Institutional Politics

Abstract: A president's most important appointments are to the Supreme Court of the United States. Unlike cabinet officers, the Senate does not routinely confirm Supreme Court justices. To study this phenomenon, I propose four related models of confirmation. The models assume senators to be political persons motivated by both partisan and institutional concerns. The data consist of 138 confirmation decisions, with the parameters estimated by probit. The models explain between 38% and 42% of the variance in confirmation decisions, while predicting 87% and 88% of the cases correctly. Institutional politics are at least as important as partisan politics in predicting decisions.

The Plessy Case: A Legal-Historical Interpretation

Abstract: In the case of Plessy v Ferguson in 1896, the Supreme Court upheld a Louisiana state law enforcing racial segregation on passenger trains This decision remained effectively the law of the land on segregation until the 1950s This book traces not only the development of the case and analyzes its decision, but, more importantly, puts it into the historical context of its times

American Indians, time, and the law: Native societies in a modern constitutional democracy

Abstract: In 1959, the Supreme Court ushered in a new era of Indian law, which recognizes Indian tribes as permanent governments within the federal constitutional system and, on the whole, honors old promises to the Indians. Drawing together historical sources such as the records of treaty negotiations with the Indians, classic political theory on the nature of sovereignty, and anthropological studies of societal change, Wilkinson evaluates the Court's work in Indian law over the past twenty five years and considers the effects of time on law.

The New Federalism Game: Primacy Implementation of Environmental Policy

Abstract: Federal environmental laws have substantially preempted state powers over pollution control. Many of these laws contain a unique implementation scheme called "primacy, " which offers a state the opportunity to become the primary enforcement agent for federal policies. Primacy relieves the federal government from enforcing laws within state boundaries even while it retains ultimate control over the policies involved and sets minimum standards. By and large, states have chosen to accept primacy. Characteristics of the units involved in the implementation process explain much of this success. Deviations from the expected patterns reveal how states can manipulate primacy to their own advantage. It is possible, however, that game playing by the states under primacy could undermine the ultimate goals of national environmental policies. A new federal relationship exists in many policy fields today, a relationship that can be described as centrally directed sharing. It is analogous to a game in which one of the players, the federal government, determines the rules for the other players, the states. One indication of this relationship is the number of mandates that have been imposed on the states by the federal government. Mandates are constraints or regulations placed on one unit of government by another. There are at least ninety-five major federal laws, executive orders, and court decisions that restrict state activity.' Mandates preempt state powers, predetermine state legislative and administrative responsibilities, and require that state compliance efforts be supervised by officials of the federal government. Although the Reagan administration's professed goal has been to return responsibility to the states, the number of direct order mandates has not been substantially reduced during Reagan's tenure.2 However, many of these mandates were imposed by the Congress or the Supreme Court and thus cannot be removed by executive fiat. Other mandates are based on constitutional

A Bird of a Different Feather? An Experimental Investigation of Physical Attractiveness and the Electability of Female Candidates

Abstract: An experimental study assessed whether a female candidate's chance of being elected would be affected by her physical attractiveness. Subjects read a biographical description of a candidate and were shown one of three differentially attractive photographs of her; all these materials, including the photos, depicted an actual candidate for Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court who had undergone a dramatic change in personal appearance. The candidate was also described as having highly feminine or masculine sex-role traits or androgynous traits, with subjects in a control condition receiving no such trait descriptions. Analysis revealed that even though the candidate's physical attractiveness had no direct impact on her appeal to voters, it did exercise powerful indirect effects mediated by her perceived femininity, dynamism, niceness and age.

The Civil Rights Society: The Social Construction of Victims

Abstract: "Bumiller is among several scholars who have questioned the excessive reliance on law, especially constitutional law and the Supreme Court, as a means of solving social problems in the United States. The book will generate much discussion among those scholars interested in critical legal studies, sociology of law, race and gender relations, the social psychology of victimization, and social stratification."--Darnell F. Hawkins, 'Contemporary Sociology.'

Symposium on Mergers and Antitrust

Abstract: M ^ X ergers and acquisitions spark ongoing controversy in the economics profession and in society at large. This is not surprising. Billion dollar deals not only involve a great deal of money, but they often raise economic issues implicating capital and labor markets as well as the markets for the products sold by the merger partners. Because of this, merger enforcement is probably the most widely known area of antitrust. However, economists who do not specialize in industrial organization generally have little understanding of the type of competitive analysis that forms the basis for merger enforcement by the antitrust authorities and the courts. This is unfortunate. Not only does this analysis have important social implications, but when formulated rigorously, the analytic model used in antitrust represents a simple, yet quite sophisticated, microeconomic model of competition. In the past ten years, economics and economists have become far more important in antitrust. The so-called "Chicago school" of antitrust has provided the intellectual rationale for a considerable loosening of antitrust law. Its intellectual leaders, for example, Robert Bork, Richard Posner, and Frank Easterbrook, have become judges and soon may ascend to (or already have joined) the Supreme Court. Economists like James Miller and George Douglas have become Federal Trade Commissioners, and the staff economists at the Commission and the Department of Justice have gained considerable influence.

The Impact of the Supreme Court on Trends in Economic Policy Making in the United States Courts of Appeals

Abstract: Previous impact research has primarily investigated controversial civil liberties decisions. The present study examines the response of the United States Courts of Appeals to changes in the labor and antitrust policies announced by the Supreme Court between 1950 and 1977. Significant impact was discovered. In each policy area, the decisional trends of the courts of appeals underwent a significant change after each of two policy shifts on the Supreme Court. Changes in the decisional trends of the courts of appeal were in the predicted direction even after controls were introduced for judges' party and holdover effects

Judicial Review of Administrative Agencies: Does the Type of Agency Matter?:

Abstract: IN EXAMINING the topic of the Supreme Court's review of administrative agencies two broad perspectives can be identified. One perspective, the legal model, suggests that the Court is primarily concerned with an agency's adherence to procedural rules rather than the substantive policies produced by the agency. This view emphasizes the Court's search for neutral standards of review and speaks in terms of the degree of deference owed the agency, the extent to which the agency's actions comport with congressional intent, and whether an agency's findings are based on substantial evidence or could be said to be arbitrary and capricious (Davis 1977). The second perspective, most frequently associated with the schools of political jurisprudence and legal realism, emphasizes the extent to which such determinations are affected by the Court's attitude toward the agency's policy decisions. Although the concepts of procedure and policy are not always easily separated, the political jurisprudence perspective stresses the Court's concern with the policy direction of the agency, not simply whether it made its decisions in a procedurally correct manner (Shapiro 1964). Adherents of political jurisprudence have employed a variety of approaches in seeking to explain judicial behavior with respect to agencies. For instance, some political scientists have adopted a case study methodology and stressed the political context within which the Court and agency, acting as supplementary lawmakers, have sought to shape substantive policy (Shapiro 1968; Fiorino 1976; Crowley 1985). Other scholars, employing aggregate data, have investigated the overall level of Court support for administrative agencies and the degree to which variations in support for individual agencies can be attributed to disagreements on questions of policy (Pritchett 1948; Tanenhaus 1960; Canon and Giles 1972; Handberg 1979). Those who have relied on aggregate data have inevitably found that the level of Court support varies from agency to agency, but there has not been a systematic investigation of whether the level of Court support depends upon the type of regulatory agency before the Court. The failure to do so may reflect the fact that no single typology of regulatory agencies has received widespread acceptance. Nevertheless, in recent years several scholars have noted that "new style" social agencies differ in important ways from "old style" economic agencies. If noticeably different interests

Explaining the Vote in Judicial Elections: the 1984 Ohio Supreme Court Elections

Abstract: rT ^HE MERITS of alternative systems for selection of state judges have been the subject of debate throughout American history (Dubois 1980: ch. 1). That debate continues today, focusing on the choice between the traditional systems of election and gubernatorial appointment and the twentieth-century innovation of the Missouri Plan, under which the governor appoints judges from a list of commission nominees. In recent years, the debate over state selection systems increasingly has been informed by empirical research about the operation and consequences of these systems, with the greatest attention given to judicial elections. A number of studies have examined patterns of outcomes in states that elect judges (Dubois 1980, 1984; Barber 1984; Hannah 1978), and several have used survey research to probe the information that voters seek and use to make their decisions (ohnson, Schaefer, and McKnight 1978; Lovrich and Sheldon 1983, 1985; Sheldon and Lovrich 1983). But there is still little survey evidence about the factors that influence voters' choices in judicial elections (but see Ladinsky and Silver 1967).' This limitation is unfortunate, because survey evidence on voters' choices is the most direct means to learn about the bases for those choices. This

The Political Impact of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Abstract: This article assesses the impact of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the Canadian political system. Unlike some commentators who have minimized the effect of the Charter, the author finds that the Charter is inducing significant and permanent changes in the conduct of Canadian politics. Canadian judges have shed their pre-Charter style of deference and self-restraint, and are playing a bolder and more influential role in the governing process. Charter decisions are remolding the Canadian criminal law process along the lines of the “due process” model and away from the “crime control” model of the pre-Charter era. The Charter has also begun to change the way the Canadian political system operates. Interest groups have responded by making greater use of Charter constitutional litigation as a tactic to pursue policy objectives. Law-making areas once solely the prerogative of provincial governments are now being threatened with uniform national standards laid down by the Supreme Court in the course of Charter decisions. Political executives are using the reference procedure to pass Charter issues on to the courts in order to avoid dealing with political “hot potatoes” such as abortion and minority language education. In sum, the predicted “judicialization of politics” is well under way.

Mutiny on the Amistad: The Saga of a Slave Revolt and Its Impact on American Abolition, Law, and Diplomacy

Abstract: Published for the first time in the UK to coincide with Steven Spielberg's forthcoming movie Amistad, Mutiny on the Amistad presents the first full-scale treatment of the only instance in history where African blacks, seized by slave dealers, won their freedom and returned home. Howard Jones describes how, in 1839, Joseph Cinque led a revolt on the Spanish slave ship, the Amistad, in the Caribbean. Allowing only the captain and first mate to live in order to steer the ship back to Sierra Leone, the Africans were tricked and taken to New York. The seizure of the ship by an American naval vessel near Montauk, Long Island, the arrest of the Africans in Connecticut, and the Spanish protest against the violation of their property rights created an international controversy. The Amistad affair united Lewis Tappan and other abolitionists who put the 'law of nature' on trial in the United States by their refusal to accept a legal system that claimed to dispense justice while permitting artificial distinctions based on race or colour. The mutiny resulted in a trial before the U.S. Supreme Court that pitted former President John Quincy Adams against the federal government. Jones vividly recaptures this compelling drama-the most famous slavery case before Dred Scott-that climaxed in the court's ruling to free the captives and allow them to return to Africa.

The Cult of the Court

Abstract: Introduction 1. The Institution 2. Ideologies of Authority 3. The Cult of the Judge 4. The Institutional Setting 5. Court Business 6. Practices in Action 7. Authority and Policy 8. Beyond the Legalist Paradox Appendix: Supreme Court Budget Requests Notes References Index

Baby Doe five years later. Implications for child health.

Abstract: Five years ago, an unfortunate baby with Down's syndrome and esophageal atresia was allowed to die of starvation in Indiana.1 His death, coming 10 years after the Supreme Court decision that legali...

The Supreme Court as an Opinion Leader Court Decisions and the Mass Public

Abstract: Evidence for the Supreme Court's legitimacy-conferring role is measured by examining shifts in pre- and postdecision public opinions polls. A study of 18 poll shifts since the 1930s indicates that the average pre- to postdecision poll shift is virtually zero. Under limited circumstances, however, larger poll shifts toward the Court's position do occur, especially when the Court makes liberal, activist decisions and when a time-lag variable is allowed for.

Fighting Faiths: The Abrams Case, the Supreme Court, and Free Speech

Abstract: Jacob Abrams et al. v. United States is the landmark Supreme Court case in the definition of free speech. Although the 1918 conviction of four Russian Jewish anarchists-for distributing leaflets protesting America's intervention in the Russian revolution-was upheld, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes's dissenting opinion (with Justice Louis Brandeis) concerning "clear and present danger" has proved the touchstone of almost all subsequent First Amendment theory and litigation.In Fighting Faiths, Richard Polenberg explores the causes and characters of this dramatic episode in American history. He traces the Jewish immigrant experience, the lives of the convicted anarchists before and after the trials, the careers of the major players in the court cases-men such as Holmes, defense attorney Harry Weinberger, Southern Judge Henry DeLamar Clayton, Jr., and the young J. Edgar Hoover-and the effects of this important case on present-day First Amendment rights.