What influences decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court? For decades social scientists focused on the ideology of individual justices. Supreme Court Decision Making moves beyond this focus by exploring how justices are influenced by the distinctive features of courts as institutions and their place in the political system. Drawing on interpretive-historical institutionalism as well as rational choice theory, a group of leading scholars consider such factors as the influence of jurisprudence, the unique characteristics of supreme courts, the dynamics of coalition building, and the effects of social movements. The volume's distinguished contributors and broad range make it essential reading for those interested either in the Supreme Court or the nature of institutional politics. Original essays contributed by Lawrence Baum, Paul Brace, Elizabeth Bussiere, Cornell Clayton, Sue Davis, Charles Epp, Lee Epstein, Howard Gillman, Melinda Gann Hall, Ronald Kahn, Jack Knight, Forrest Maltzman, David O'Brien, Jeffrey Segal, Charles Sheldon, James Spriggs II, and Paul Wahlbeck.

This book provides a comprehensive exploration of ideological patterns of judicial behaviour in the Supreme Court of Canada. Relying on an expansive database of Canadian Supreme Court rulings between 1984 and 2003, the authors present the most systematic discussion of the attitudinal model of decision making ever conducted outside the setting of the US Supreme Court. The groundbreaking discussion of the viability of this model as a unifying theory of judicial behaviour in high courts around the world will be essential reading for a wide range of legal scholars and court watchers.

There are three general models of Supreme Court decision making: the legal model, the attitudinal model and the strategic model. But each is somewhat incomplete. This book advances an integrated model of Supreme Court decision making that incorporates variables from each of the three models. In examining the modern Supreme Court, since Brown v. Board of Education, the book argues that decisions are a function of the sincere preferences of the justices, the nature of precedent, and the development of the particular issue, as well as separation of powers and the potential constraints posed by the president and Congress. To test this model, the authors examine all full, signed civil liberties and economic cases decisions in the 1953–2000 period. Decision Making by the Modern Supreme Court argues, and the results confirm, that judicial decision making is more nuanced than the attitudinal or legal models have argued in the past.

Why do judges study legal sources that originated outside their own national legal system, and how do they use arguments from these sources in deciding domestic cases? Based on interviews with judges, this book presents the inside story of how judges engage with international and comparative law in the highest courts of the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, France and the Netherlands. A comparative analysis of the views and experiences of the judges clarifies how the decision-making of these Western courts has developed in light of the internationalisation of law and the increased opportunities for transnational judicial communication. While the qualitative analysis reveals the motives that judges claim for using foreign law and the influence of 'globalist' and 'localist' approaches to judging, the author also finds suggestions of a convergence of practices between the courts that are the subject of this study. This empirical analysis is complemented by a constitutional-theoretical inquiry into the procedural and substantive factors of legal evolution, which enable or constrain the development and possible convergence of highest courts' practices. The two strands of the analysis are connected in a final contextual reflection on the future development of the role of Western highest courts.

In the mid-1970s, as a social psychologist dedicated to the application of knowl edge, I welcomed our field's emerging interest in the legal system. I have al ways been fascinated by jury trials-something about the idea that two con ceptions of the truth were in irrevocable conflict and jurors could choose only one of them. More important, the criminal justice system is a major social force that has been ignored by social psychologists for most of the twentieth century. As I systematically began to explore the applications of social psycho logical concepts to the law 20 years ago, I experienced the delight of discovery similar to that of a child under a Christmas tree. It has been satisfying to be among the cohort of researchers who have studied the legal system, especially trial juries, from a psychological perspective. I believe we have learned much that would be useful if the system were to be revised. Hlf the system were to be revised" . . . there's the rub. As I have stated, my original motivation was the application of knowledge. Like other social scien tists, I believed-perhaps arrogantly-that the results of our research efforts could be used to make trial juries operate with more efficiency, accuracy, and satisfaction. Qver the last two decades, much knowledge has accumulated. How can we put this knowledge to work? Judges are the gatekeepers of the legal system.

The U.S. Supreme Court is a public policy battleground in which organized interests attempt to etch their economic, legal, and political preferences into law through the filing of amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs. In Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making, Paul M. Collins, Jr. explores how organized interests influence the justices' decision making, including how the justices vote and whether they choose to author concurrences and dissents. Collins presents theories of judicial choice derived from disciplines as diverse as law, marketing, political science, and social psychology. This theoretically rich and empirically rigorous treatment of decision-making on the nation's highest court, which represents the most comprehensive examination ever undertaken of the influence of U.S. Supreme Court amicus briefs, provides clear evidence that interest groups play a significant role in shaping the justices' choices.

Known for shedding light on the link between the courts, public policy, and the political environment, Judicial Process in America offers students a clear but comprehensive overview of today’s American judiciary. Considering the courts from every level, the authors thoroughly cover judges, lawyers, litigants, and the variables at play in judicial decision-making. The highly anticipated Eleventh Edition offers updated coverage of recent Supreme Court rulings, including same-sex marriage and health care subsidies; the effect of three women justices on the Court′s patterns of decision; and the policy-making role of state tribunals as they consider an increasing number of state programs and policies. New to this Edition Discussions of recent judicial appointments take a critical look at how President Trump’s victory has set the stage for moving the ideological direction of the Supreme Court and of the lower federal judiciary in a distinctly more conservative direction. An analysis of recent controversial Supreme Court decisions help students to identify with the content by exploring issues such as, citizenship rights for immigrants, gay and lesbian rights, and freedom of speech and religion. Additional tables and graphs illustrate the patterns and trends that are occurring in today’s judicial process. New coverage of current topics help students see how the judicial process is applied. These topics include: the legality of Congress’ feeble attempts to "repeal and replace" the Affordable Care Act that affects millions of people; how to address the issues of immigration and deportations, including what to do about so-called Dreamers (children brought illegally to the United States by their parents without the children’s knowledge and who have spent much or all of their lives here); the status of abortion rights in America as more and more conservative states have sought to further restrict a woman’s right to such a procedure; the legal status of transgender persons in the armed forces; the degree to which severely gerrymandered legislative districts pass constitutional muster; and the great changes in the issue of same-sex marriage, both among average Americans and within the state and federal court systems (including all the ancillary issues such as whether same-sex couples can adopt children and obtain government fringe benefits).

In the course of a single investor-state dispute, an arbitrator may make numerous decisions, from interpreting the treaty or national laws to taking into account case law, customs and policies. In practice, this process raises important issues regarding the consistency of decisions and the predictability and legitimacy of the decision-making process in general. Investment arbitration tribunals have developed a specialised process of legal decision making adapted to the interpretational needs that arise in the context of an investor-state dispute and to the transnational characteristics of the investment arbitration framework. This is the first book to offer an in-depth analysis of the transnational characteristics of investment arbitration and to analyse the interpretive arguments of investment tribunals and the way they use treaties, precedent, policies, general principles of law and customary law in their decision-making process. Drawing on publicly available arbitral case law supplemented with personal interviews with investment arbitrators, the author touches on such concepts and practices as the following: - an overview of various decision-making genres of arbitral tribunals: attitudinal, economic, strategic and legal; - the legal argumentation triptych of language–rhetoric–dialogue; - the specific language arbitrators have developed when interpreting the law; - how arbitrators use the concepts 'standards', 'rules', 'principles' and 'rights'; - the importance of the legal reasoning of arbitral awards and the role of rhetoric therein; - concepts of 'acceptability', 'audience' and 'legitimacy'; - limitations of the public international law interpretive methodology enshrined in the Vienna Convention; - interpretation of precedents, customary law, general principles of law and policies; - the way national and international legal orders interact in the context of interpretation; and - how decision-making is connected to the issues of predictability, consistency and the rule of law. The core of the book proposes a novel, full- edged dialogical network theory for analysing the interpretation process. As an exemplary demonstration of developing theory to keep up with practice, this unique book provides a deeply engaged means for enhancing the practice of international arbitration. Its introduction of a new field of interdisciplinary analysis employing legal argumentation theories is sure to provide inestimable guidance for institutions and policymakers, especially in light of recent proposals for the creation of a permanent investment arbitration court. Given that unveiling the legal decision-making process is critical for the well-being of the whole dispute resolution procedure, and that being aware of how arbitrators interpret the law can constitute a roadmap for counsel's arguments and approaches when dealing with cross-border disputes, the topic of this book is relevant for both academics and practitioners, and its signifcance can only grow as recourse to investor-state arbitration continues to expand.

Processes of Constitutional Decisionmaking: Cases and Material 2016 Supplement

The Oxford Handbook of U.S. Judicial Behavior offers readers a comprehensive introduction and analysis of research regarding decision making by judges serving on federal and state courts in the U.S. Featuring contributions from leading scholars in the field, the Handbook describes and explains how the courts' political and social context, formal institutional structures, and informal norms affect judicial decision making. The Handbook also explores the impact of judges' personal attributes and preferences, as well as prevailing legal doctrine, influence, and shape case outcomes in state and federal courts. The volume also proposes avenues for future research in the various topics addressed throughout the book. Consultant Editor for The Oxford Handbooks of American Politics George C. Edwards III.