Courts and Executive Authority: Judicial Decision-Making on Executive Power Challenges in the U.S. States

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gbemende Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
The U.S

The Role of Gender Norms in Judicial Decision-Making at the U.S. Supreme Court: The Case of Male and Female Justices

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 494-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane A. Gleason ◽  
Jennifer J. Jones ◽  
Jessica Rae McBean
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Gender Norms ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Masculine Norms ◽  
Gender Impacts ◽  
The U.S

Although still a minority, the growing number of women on both the Bench and at the Bar of the U.S. Supreme Court has important implications for judicial decision-making and successful advocacy at the Court. Research in judicial behavior generally focuses on vote direction and the presence of female attorneys in a case. We offer a more nuanced account of how gender impacts both attorney success and judicial decision-making by drawing on work in social and political psychology and utilizing quantitative textual analysis to explore the tension between masculine norms of behavior that are valued in the legal profession and feminine norms of behavior that are expected of women, but devalued in the legal profession. Based on the Court’s long-standing disdain for emotional arguments, we examine how the emotional content in 601 party briefs shapes the Court’s majority opinions. Our results indicate that male justices evaluate counsel based on their compliance with traditional gender norms—rewarding male counsel for cool, unemotional arguments and rewarding female counsel for emotionally compelling arguments. However, we find no evidence that gender norms shape the opinions of female justices. Given that the justice system is supposed to be “blind,” our results highlight the durability of gendered expectations and raise questions about the objectivity of judicial decision-making.

Civil Liability Against Prison Officials for Inmate-On-Inmate Assault: Where are We and Where Have We Been?

1995 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL S. VAUGHN ◽  
ROLANDO V. DEL CARMEN
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Correctional Facilities ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
Statistical Frequency ◽  
Civil Liabilities ◽  
Circuit Courts ◽  
The U.S

This article focuses on civil liabilities imposed on prison officials for inmate-by-inmate assault in correctional facilities. After briefly discussing the statistical frequency of inmate-by-inmate assault, the article examines Farmer v. Brennan, a case on inmate-by-inmate assault decided in 1994 by the U.S. Supreme Court. Through an analysis of 96 pre-Farmer cases on inmate assault decided in the U.S. circuit courts of appeals, the article outlines the parameters under which officials might be held liable in post-Farmer litigation. The article concludes that the circumstances and situations under which prison officials are liable will not sufficiently change because the realities of judicial decision making may make it difficult for individual judges to distinguish between pre-Farmer and post-Farmer standards.

Context Effects in Judicial Decision Making

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Rachlinski ◽  
Chris Guthrie ◽  
Andrew J. Wistrich
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Context Effects ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making

scholarly journals Interpreting change through legal culture: the case of the Irish exclusionary rule

Legal Studies ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Claire Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Culture ◽  
Macro Level ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Exclusionary Rule ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
The Common ◽  
Law Of Evidence

Abstract The changes to the Irish exclusionary rule introduced by the judgment in People (DPP) v JC mark an important watershed in the Irish law of evidence and Irish legal culture more generally. The case relaxed the exclusionary rule established in People (DPP) v Kenny, one of the strictest in the common law world, by creating an exception based on ‘inadvertence’. This paper examines the decision through the lens of legal culture, drawing in particular on Lawrence Friedman's distinction between ‘internal’ and ‘external’ legal culture to help understand the factors contributing to the decision. The paper argues that Friedman's concept and, in particular, the dialectic between internal and external legal culture, holds much utility at a micro as well as macro level, in interrogating the cultural logics at work in judicial decision-making.

Mimoprávní vlivy na rozhodování českého Ústavního soudu

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hubert Smekal ◽  
Jaroslav Benák ◽  
Monika Hanych ◽  
Ladislav Vyhnánek ◽  
Štěpán Janků
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Judicial Decision ◽  
Judicial Decision Making ◽  
The Media ◽  
Book Studies ◽  
The Impact

The book studies other than purely legal factors that influence the Czech Constitutional Court judges in their decision-making. The publication is inspired by foreign models of judicial decision-making and discusses their applicability in the Czech environment. More specifically, it focuses, for example, on the influence of the judge’s personality, collegiality, strategic decision-making or the impact of public opinion and the media. The book is based mainly on interviews with current constitutional judges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document