Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Are Judges Political?: An Empirical Analysis of the Federal Judiciary Hardcover – June 8, 2006
|New from||Used from|
"We're Still Right, They're Still Wrong" by James Carville
We’re Still Right, They’re Still Wrong is a timely guide for voters, politicians, and journalists trying to make sense of our country’s most divisive and contentious election of the century. Learn more
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
"Recommended." D. S. Mann, College of Charleston, CHOICE, 5/1/2007
"Recommended for academic and law libraries, as well as court administrators and administrative judges who strive to maintain nonpartisanship on the bench." Philip Y. Blue, New York State Supreme Court Criminal Branch Law Library, Library Journal, 9/1/2006
"Not only is this a solid piece of research, it also does a remarkable job of translating complex ideas long floating around in the social sciences into prose accessible to a broad audience. This is an important service. Plus, the book couldn't come at a better time. Senators (and presidents), for the most part, understand the ideological component of judging but the public seems to need a reminder. ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? provides just that." Lee Epstein, Northwestern University
"ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? is thoughtful and careful. It is a terrific empirical introduction to the politics of judicial decisionmaking, an area that is capturing the imagination of many in the legal academy. The analysis of panel effects, which appear to be as large as partisan effects, is especially interesting." Jeffrey A. Segal, Stony Brook University
"a short, readable, book that gets to implications after only 128 pages of straight-forward, hypothesis-driven, data-mining text. The accessibility of this book makes it a good choice for teachers who want to provoke students to discuss issues on the basis of empirical evidence, and it might lead some students to think about doing this kind of research themselves." Law and Politics Book Review
"For two decades now U.S. senators have fought fiercely about the appointments of federal appellate judges, all in the belief that the political ideologies of judges affect their decisions. But do they? This dazzling little book answers the question--and the answer is more interesting than we would have thought. ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? will change and deepen the way we think about the law and judges." Neil Coughlan, Judicial Evaluation Institute, Commonweal, 10/6/2006
"This is a significant book. The judiciary decides many important policy questions in the United States, and in practice the circuit court judiciary is much more important than the Supreme Court. This is evident by the great and growing press and political attention to judicial nominees. ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? greatly informs the debate, with its empirical findings and its discussion of their pragmatic significance." Frank B. Cross, University of Texas-Austin
"This is a significant book. The judiciary decides many important policy questions in the United States, and in practice the circuit court judiciary is much more important than the Supreme Court. This is evident by the great and growing press and political attention to judicial nominees. ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? greatly informs the debate, with its empirical findings and its discussion of their pragmatic significance." ¿Frank B. Cross, University of Texas-Austin
Top Customer Reviews
The authors set out to test three fundamental hypotheses with data drawn from examination of 6,408 cases involving some 19,224 separate judicial votes during the 1995-2004 period. First, in ideologically-contested controversial cases, can voting "tendencies" be predicted based on the party of the appointing president? Next, does "ideological dampening" -- that is, the presence of two judges of a different political party on the panel -- influence a third judge of a different party? Finally, is there "ideological amplification" of judicial attitudes if all three judges on a panel are of the same party, so that more extreme positions are taken than with a mixed panel?
The authors find that all three of these hypotheses are supported in a wide range of cases involving 13 issues such as campaign finance, sexual discrimination, and commercial speech.Read more ›
Good books and other information on Law here:
Midwest Independent Research