To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Associate justices of the supreme court.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Associate justices of the supreme court'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 23 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Associate justices of the supreme court.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Trudden, Sallie Raye. "The Power Behind the Constitution: The Supreme Court." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2009. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1864.
Full textAbstract:
The framers of the Constitution designed a document to be the "Supreme Law of the Land" and within its pages a branch of government, a federal judiciary, never before envisioned. The Constitution, along with the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789, set the framework for building the strongest branch of government, the Supreme Court. Historical events and court decisions with few exceptions strengthened the power of the judiciary contributing to its authority. The Supreme Court Justices, by interpreting the Constitution and judging the legality of laws instituted by both state and federal legislatures, solidified its superior position in the government hierarchy. An examination of documents, case decisions, and the results of these decisions for the nation add credence to the assertion that of the three branches of government the strongest and most powerful was and is the Supreme Court.
2
Valenzuela, Celene. "The 'Lean In' Theory, Validated by Three Supreme Court Justices." CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2018. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/757.
Full textAbstract:
The definition of leadership is not gender specific; however, the role of a leader continues to be defined in mostly male terms by society. While, women have outpaced men in gaining an undergraduate education, women are not being hired for top leadership roles. There continues to be a gender leadership gap in both the private and public sector. Women continue to advance in their education and career, yet they are unable to break the invisible glass ceiling and attain top leadership roles.
This study proposes that in order to gain equality and reduce the gender leadership gap, in both the public and private sector, it is up to individual women to seek and attain leadership positions, thereby opening the path for others. The study identified both the internal and external barriers that prevent women from moving ahead in their careers. It also provided solutions that women can adopt to gain top leadership roles, based on Sheryl Sandberg’s ‘Lean In’ theory, which notes that women can make adjustments and strategies in order to obtain top leadership positions. Women can overcome barriers and move ahead with their careers by increasing self-confidence, balancing roles at home, and setting realistic standards. Women need to also step out of their comfort zone and believe in themselves.
Through a qualitative content analysis, the study analyzed how three women achieved top leadership roles and were successful in applying the concepts of Sheryl Sandberg’s ‘Lean In’ theory. The study included Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor. The study identified the barriers that they individually faced as they sought their career. The women were selected to be part of the study due to their incredible accomplishments of achieving positions in the highest level of judicial public service, in a male-dominated field.
The sampling and collection in this study included the digital autobiographies and biographies of the public service leaders, by creditable sources. The analysis sought to answer the three study questions: What forms of barriers did the Associate Justices face as they advanced in their careers? What strategies and approaches did the Associate Justices take when faced with barriers? How does Sheryl Sandberg’s ‘Lean In’ theory apply to the Associate Justices? The written autobiographies and biographies of the Associate Justices were analyzed using NVivo, a software that analyzes digital texts. Two coding categories were selected as part of the analysis. One focused on the barriers that the Associate Justices encountered as they moved ahead with their career and the second category focused on the strategies and approaches they used to overcome them.
The study findings demonstrated that the Associate Justices faced a significant number of barriers as they sought to advance in their legal careers. They encountered discrimination, gender bias and the obstacles of balancing their careers and family. The analysis results also strongly conveyed that the Associate Justices used a number of strategies and approaches to overcome the barriers. They were self-confident and set realistic standards – therefore validating Sheryl Sandberg’s ‘Lean In’ theory.
3
Glennon, Colin, and Logan Strother. "The Maintenance of Institutional Legitimacy in Supreme Court Justices’ Public Rhetoric." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1086/703065.
Full textAbstract:
Judicial politics scholars routinely posit that the behavior of Supreme Court justices is motivated in important part by concerns of institutional maintenance, that is, by a desire to maintain the Court’s unusually large store of institutional legitimacy. Previous work on this topic, however, has focused almost exclusively on the influence of such motivation on judicial decision making. We contend that if institutional maintenance is an important goal, it should be observable in other contexts as well. We examine televised mass-media interviews with Supreme Court justices from 1998 to 2016 and find that legitimacy reinforcement is the predominant goal reflected in justices’ rhetoric in those interviews.
4
Poston, Brook Carl Potts Louis W. "George's court the role of the Supreme Court justices as statesmen in the 1790's /." Diss., UMK access, 2007.
Find full textAbstract:
Thesis (M.A.)--Dept. of History. University of Missouri--Kansas City, 2007.<br>"A thesis in history." Typescript. Advisor: Louis Potts. Vita. Title from "catalog record" of the print edition Description based on contents viewed Jan. 24, 2008. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 98-103). Online version of the print edition.
5
Ingles, Mark Thomas. "Questioning Justices: An Examination of Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings From 1955-2005." Bowling Green State University / OhioLINK, 2010. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1288628751.
Full text
6
SERRANO, PAULO MARCELO DE MIRANDA. "PATHS TO THE COURT: STATE AND SOCIETY IN THE NOMINATION OF JUSTICES TO THE BRAZILIAN SUPREME COURT." PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO RIO DE JANEIRO, 2015. http://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/Busca_etds.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=26899@1.
Full textAbstract:
PONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO RIO DE JANEIRO<br>O tema da pesquisa é o Supremo Tribunal Federal, enfrentando a seguinte questão: o modelo de escolha dos ministros do STF deve ser alterado ou mantido? A investigação tem por objetivo chaves para essa indagação. A relevância do tema é justificada pela importância, no cenário nacional, do Supremo Tribunal Federal, que, além de se encontrar no vértice do Poder Judiciário, encontra-se presente, de forma crescente, na vida contemporânea da sociedade brasileira. São objetivos intermediários da pesquisa: verificar por que o Senado brasileiro, nos séculos 20 e 21, até o momento, jamais deixou de aprovar a escolha dos presidentes da República; quem são os ministros do período mais recente, adotando-se como delimitação temporal os trintas anos do período de redemocratização iniciados em 1985; e, finalmente, por que o Brasil mudou tanto desde 1891 e a forma de escolha dos ministros do STF nunca foi alterada, bem como de que maneira o aparente paradoxo existente entre um sistema institucional dinâmico e um modelo de escolha conservador pode nos revelar o caráter do sistema institucional brasileiro. Ao final, respondendo ao objetivo geral, avalia-se quais são as alterações com maior viabilidade de serem introduzidas, tanto por cambio formal do modelo, quanto pelo modo de sua efetivação e acompanhamento pela sociedade. A seguir, é feita contribuição própria, apontando caminhos para ensejar e motivar a participação da sociedade civil no processo. Encerrando o trabalho, após desvendar os caminhos que levam homens e mulheres para a Corte Suprema brasileira, que, por sua vez, determinam os caminhos que a própria Corte percorrerá, é feito, em considerações finais, um esforço interpretativo que sugere o que pode a escolha dos ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal, enquanto fenômeno sócio-político, revelar sobre o Brasil contemporâneo.<br>The research theme is the Brazilian Supreme Court, facing the following question: should the model of choosing the justices be altered or maintained? The goal of the investigation is finding keys to this question. The relevance of the theme is justified by the importance, in the national scene, of the Brazilian Supreme Court, which not only is at the top of the Judiciary Power, but finds itself increasingly present in contemporary brazilian society life. Intermediate goals of the research are: investigate why the brazilian Senate, from the 20th and 21st century until present day, has never disapproved the choice of presidents of the Republic; who are the most recent ministers, setting as temporal delimitation the thirty years of redemocratization starting in 1985; and finally, why did Brazil change so much since 1891 and the model of choosing justices was never altered, as well as how the apparently existing paradox between an institutional dynamic system and a conservative model of choice can reveal the character of the Brazilian institutional system. In closing, while answering the main goals, an review on the alterations with most viability of being introduced in provided, both by formal model switching as well as by method of execution and followup by society. After that, a personal contribution is made, pointing paths to give rise and motivate participation of the civil society in this process. Finishing the research, after unveiling the paths that lead men and women to the Brazilian Supreme Court, paths that determine the course of the Court itself, an effort is made, as final considerations, suggesting what the choice of ministers of the Brazilian Supreme Court, as a social-political phenomena, reveal about contemporary Brazil.
7
Strother, Logan, and Colin Glennon. "Can Supreme Court Justices Go Public? The Effect of Justice Rhetoric on Judicial Legitimacy." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2019. https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/7773.
Full text
8
Whitaker, Robert A. "Freedom of a speech| The speeches of the Warren Court Justices and the legitimacy of the Supreme Court." Thesis, State University of New York at Albany, 2017. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=10246592.
Full textAbstract:
<p> While justices of the U.S. Supreme Court routinely claim they do not deliver speeches to audiences outside the Court, or that the content of their remarks is unimportant, scholars have long recognized that the justices speak frequently off the bench. Despite this recognition, studies of judicial speech view it largely as a potential transgression of legal norms, risking the images of neutrality and independence that are widely seen as the primary bases of the Court’s legitimacy; few studies have explored judicial speech in any detail, and surprisingly little is known about the actual content of the justices’ speeches. In this dissertation, I pose two primary questions: first, what do the justices say, and second, what does the content of judicial speech tell us about institutional legitimacy? Reviewing approximately 400 speeches by the justices of the Warren Court (1953–1969), I find the justices’ speeches generally appear as any one of four primary themes: advocating future policy and signaling outside actors to prepare for implementation, in advance of a major ruling by the Court; defending the Court’s rulings on the basis of projecting favorable images of democracy abroad; defending the Court’s rulings on the basis of constitutional claims and understandings and defending against broader attacks on judicial authority, such as court-curbing legislation; and last, articulating idealized visions of democracy and future politics. Further, I find evidence of these themes in the speeches of the justices of the Roberts Court in 2012. Contrary to the judicial “lockjaw” conception of speech as a threat to neutrality and legitimacy, I find judicial speech, while shaped by legal norms, frequently draws upon values and structures associated with democracy, enabling the justices to rework and construct political narratives about the Court and its rulings in speeches that attend to the Court’s institutional legitimacy.</p>
9
Wyant, Nicholas Nye. "Gideon, Escobedo and Miranda: How three Supreme Court Justices waged the ideological battle against communism." Thesis, Wichita State University, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/10057/1555.
Full textAbstract:
The United States Supreme Court was at the center of criticism in the 1960s. Unpopular Court decisions, such as expanding the rights of the criminally accused, brought the Court a lot of attention. The Court is the most removed body of government in the United States, being that members are appointed, not elected. Thus this separation from the Court created the need to explain its behavior, i.e. why it produced the opinions it did. This paper explores three Court decisions, Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), and Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and argues that the decisions in each case were due to the individual Justices experience with communism, than with any other of the theories behind the Court’s action.<br>Thesis (M.A)-- Wichita State University, College of College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Dept. of History<br>"December 2007."
10
Wyant, Nicholas Nye Johnson Judith. "Gideon, Escobedo and Miranda: How three Supreme Court Justices waged the ideological battle against communism /." Thesis, A link to full text of this thesis in SOAR, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/10057/1555.
Full text
11
Sittiwong, Panu. "Canadian Supreme Court Decision-Making: The Personal Attribute Model in Explaining Justices' Patterns of Decision-Making, 1949-1980." Thesis, North Texas State University, 1985. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc504493/.
Full textAbstract:
This study has two purposes: first, to test the validity of the personal attribute model in explaining judicial voting behavior outside its original cultural context; second, to explain the variation in justice's voting behavior in the Canadian Supreme Court. For the most part, the result arrived in this study supports the validity of the model in cross-cultural analysis. The result of multiple regression analysis shows that four variables, region, judicial experience prior to appointment, political party of appointing Prime Minister, and tenure account for 60 percent of the variations in justice's voting behavior. This result, hence, provides an empirical finding to the development of the personal attribute model in explaining justices' voting behavior.
12
Saulsbury, Sarah. "An Analysis of Cross-Ideological Expectation Voting on the United States Supreme Court, 2000-2017." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2020. https://dc.etsu.edu/honors/555.
Full textAbstract:
Contrasted with the other branches of government, the Supreme Court has long been an institution posing a level of secretiveness equal to its power. Naturally, that has developed a desire, and maybe necessity, to gain a better understanding regarding the principal influences of judicial decision making on America’s highest Court. One phenomenon that has long been of interest to Court observers is the notion of the justice’s voting across established ideological lines. Previous attempts to explain and reconcile cross-ideological votes have focused on the influence of external actors on the Court, its legitimacy, public opinion, and dynamics between justices. Yet, there remains a need to scrutinize the types of cases most likely to produce cross-ideological votes among justices in order to offer explanatory factors as to when a particular cross-ideological vote occurs. Often ignored in the quest to ascertain factors influencing particular justices and the Court as a whole, is the need for a study of case topics and the ability of these topics to correlate to an unexpected vote by a justice. In this thesis, I analyze which legal issues embedded within Supreme Court cases are most likely to produce cross-ideological votes among justices. I then propose a theory for predicting what issue areas are most likely to produce cross-ideological votes among Supreme Court justices in the future. In this research, I find that the issue area of criminal procedure correlates to the largest number of cross-ideological votes by Supreme Court members. Interestingly, I also find that conservative and liberal justices are equally inconsistent in voting concerning criminal procedure cases.
13
Gurrola, Cassandra. "Judging the Justices: A Critical Analysis of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." Scholarship @ Claremont, 2011. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/205.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis examines the recently decided Supreme Court case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The case regards campaign finance reform, and has raised significant controversy recently. This thesis will evaluate the arguments from both the dissent and the majority opinions, contextualize these arguments with respect to the history of campaign finance reform and the history of the legislation with regard to corporations, and will ultimately pass judgment on whether the Court was correct in its decision. Implications for the post-Citizens world will also be considered.
14
Martin, Roderick Graham. "The common law and the justices of the Supreme Court of the North-West Territories, 1887-1907." Thesis, National Library of Canada = Bibliothèque nationale du Canada, 1997. http://www.collectionscanada.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ftp04/mq24601.pdf.
Full text
15
Keith, Linda Camp. "An Exploratory Analysis of Judicial Activism in the United States Supreme Court's Nullification of Congressional Statutes." Thesis, University of North Texas, 1994. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc500902/.
Full textAbstract:
This study analyzes activist behavior of Supreme Court justices in 132 decisions which struck down congressional statutes as unconstitutional in 1789-1990. Analysis of the justices' activist rates and liberalism scores demonstrate that these votes are ideologically based. Integrated models containing personal attribute and case factor variables are constructed to explore the votes as activist behavior. The same models are also tested with a new dependent variable constructed to measure the nullification votes as liberal votes. The models which explain the votes as ideological responses better explain the votes than the models which explain the votes as activism or restraint. The attribute variables offer better explanation in the late 20th century models and the case factors offer better explanation in the early period models.
16
Millhouse, Louis M. "The Supreme Court, religion, and the intent of the Framers : an analysis of the sitting Justices' Establishment Clause philosophies /." Diss., This resource online, 1997. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-08032007-102249/.
Full text
17
Glennon, Colin, and Mikel Norris. "Indicators of Judicial Greatness: An Exploration into which Factors Influence or Predict wither Supreme Court Justices Will be Considered Historically Great." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2015. https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/529.
Full textAbstract:
While rankings of presidents are quite common, rankings of Supreme Court justices are much rarer. Herein I produce one and make use of both to see if perceived greatness of one actor can effect perceptions of greatness for the other. This work examines those influences that indicate success for Supreme Court Justices by seeking to determine what the historically great justices have in common. I first develop a composite score of all the Supreme Court Justices based on the limited previous ranking research and relevant indictors to rank the Justices 1-112. Next, I examine potential indicators of such success; previous experience, personal characteristics, conformation vote, and most interestingly the perceived greatness of their appointing president. This research finds a direct relationship between perceptions of presidential greatness and perceptions of judicial quality. Overall the great Justices are statistically more likely to be appointed by a great president, consistent with the appointment literature that often describes an appointer-appointee relationship as a legacy impacting one.
18
Glennon, Colin. "Bucking the Trend: Why Lyndon Johnson’s Supreme Court Appointments are Outliers in the Ideological Relationship Between Modern Presidents and the Justices they Nominate." Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University, 2013. https://dc.etsu.edu/etsu-works/531.
Full text
19
Lynch, David. "The role of the circuit courts in the development of federal justice and the shaping of United States law in the early Republic : Supreme Court Justices Washington, Livingston, Story, and Thompson on circuit and on the court." Thesis, Liverpool John Moores University, 2015. http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/4347/.
Full textAbstract:
While scholars have focused on the importance of the landmark decisions of the United States Supreme Court and its Chief Justice, John Marshall, in the rising influence of the federal justice system in the early Republic, the crucial role of the circuit courts in establishing uniformity of federal law and procedure across the nation has largely been ignored. This thesis seeks to remedy this lack of research on circuit courts by revealing the central role of their presiding Supreme Court justices in the successful development of a national court system drawn up from the ‘inferior’ courts rather than down from the Supreme Court to the lower jurisdictions. This thesis argues that, at a time when the Supreme Court had few cases to consider, all of the nation’s law was formulated by the lower courts; with very few decisions appealed, the circuit court opinions were invariably accepted as final, settling the law for each circuit and for the nation if followed by other justices. Therefore, in the early years, it was the circuit experience and not Supreme Court authority which shaped the course of United States law. This thesis contributes to an understanding of this early justice system because of its focus on and the depth of its research into the work of the circuit courts. Through detailed analysis, it reveals the sources used by the justices to influence the direction of the law and, by its reading of almost 2000 cases tried by four prominent Marshall associate justices, presents insights into momentous issues facing the Union. The thesis examines the generality of the circuit work of each justice but pays particular attention to the different ways in which each contributed to the shaping of United States law. Understanding the importance of the role of the circuit courts leads to a more informed reading of early American legal history.
20
Jorge, Álvaro Palma de. "Supremo interesse: protagonismo político-regulatório e a evolução institucional do processo de seleção dos ministros do STF." reponame:Repositório Institucional do FGV, 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/10438/16202.
Full textAbstract:
Submitted by ALVARO AMARAL DE FRANÇA COUTO PALMA DE JORGE (alvaro@palmaguedes.com.br) on 2016-03-04T16:27:11Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5)<br>Approved for entry into archive by BRUNA BARROS (bruna.barros@fgv.br) on 2016-03-28T18:17:59Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5)<br>Approved for entry into archive by Maria Almeida (maria.socorro@fgv.br) on 2016-03-30T13:38:15Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5)<br>Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-30T13:38:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Disertação final 24-02-16 Digitalização.pdf: 1898367 bytes, checksum: 6933d11f9d4910e8468a2eb589ece7ad (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2016-02-24<br>Based on the fact that higher courts are assuming a greater role in Brazil today, as is the global trend in complex contemporary societies, in the shaping of public policy and regulation, the study aims to map the evolution – and progressive democratization – of the checks and balances structure established in the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, i.e., the selection process of justice for Federal Supreme Court, Brazil’s apex constitutional court. The text analyses the institutional/constitutional framework of the selection process for new justices, and exemplify changes in the profile of political players, in the network of competences of institutions involved in the process and in the social, political, economic and cultural context that pushed through the practical transformation of the institutional selection model without altering, however, the format originally established in the 19th Century. By mapping the origin and evolution of the constitutional formula for collaboration between the Executive and Legislative branches in choosing the members of the Judiciary’s highest court, the study finds the origin of the Brazilian model in the US experience, describing the latter and making parallels between the two. Taking the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil as a milestone, the work demonstrates the even greater mobilization of political and social players concerning the selection process, especially in relation to the hearings and confirmation of appointments for the Federal Supreme Court by the Federal Senate Constitution, Justice and Civic Rights Commission (CCJ). Finally, the studies analyzes actual CCJ hearing sessions and some of the main discussions therein so as to draw lessons that may guide the debate on the evolution of the selection process of justices to the Federal Supreme Court , including as an early control tool used by those involved in the creation of future public policy through Federal Supreme Court decisions.<br>Partindo da constatação de que o Brasil acompanha hoje um fenômeno global de protagonismo das cortes supremas nas sociedades complexas contemporâneas, notadamente na criação de políticas-públicas e regulação, o estudo procura mapear a evolução – e progressiva democratização – de uma estrutura de freios e contrapesos prevista na Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 ('Constituição'), qual seja, o processo de seleção dos ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ao longo do texto é analisada a arquitetura institucional e constitucional do processo de indicação e aprovação de novos ministros, bem como exemplificadas mudanças no perfil dos atores políticos, no plexo de competências das instituições envolvidas e no contexto social, político, econômico e cultural que forçaram a transformação prática do modelo de seleção institucional, sem alteração, no entanto, da formatação originalmente prevista desde o Século XIX. Mapeando a origem e evolução da fórmula constitucional de colaboração entre o Poder Executivo e o Poder Legislativo para a escolha dos membros da cúpula do Poder Judiciário, o estudo identifica a origem do modelo brasileiro na inspiração da experiência norte-americana, descrevendo esta e os paralelos possíveis com aquele. A partir do marco central da Constituição, o trabalho procura demonstrar uma progressiva mobilização de atores políticos e sociais em relação ao processo de escolha, notadamente em relação ao momento em que os indicados para o Supremo Tribunal Federal são sabatinados pela Comissão de Constituição, Justiça e Cidadania do Senado Federal. Finalmente, são analisadas concretamente as sabatinas e algumas das suas principais discussões, buscando extrair lições que sirvam de norte colaborativo para a evolução da forma de seleção dos ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal, inclusive como instrumento de controle prévio de seus membros, futuros elaboradores de políticas-públicas.
21
Sharma, Hemant. "The Sword, the Purse and the Gavel: Institutional Influences on the Behavior of Supreme Court Justices." 2009. http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/97.
Full textAbstract:
An inherent contradiction exists between two fundamental principles embedded in American political philosophy: the notion of "checks and balances" and the idea of an "independent judiciary." After all, a truly "independent" branch of government would be immune to the influences, or "checks," of external institutions. This dissertation addresses that juxtaposition through a two part analysis of Supreme Court decision-making.
The first part uses multivariate regression to illustrate that justices confirmed under conditions of divided government are more moderate in their voting behavior than justices confirmed under conditions of unified government. Ancillary findings also reveal that justices who receive more votes during their Senate confirmation hearings will be more moderate in their voting behavior and that justices appointed by presidents with higher Gallup Approval Ratings tend to be more "extreme" in their voting behavior. Overall, the confirmation process appears to offer an avenue through which the executive and legislative branches can "check and balance" the voting outputs of the Supreme Court.
The second part of this dissertation assesses the degree to which justices remain independent from the influences of the "political" branches once they begin serving on the Court. Time series regression models indicate that Supreme Court justices are likely to vary their voting behavior in civil rights and civil liberties cases based on which party controls the White House at the time a vote is being cast. Evidence also shows that justices are likely to vary their voting behavior in economic cases based on which party is strongest in Congress. Beyond that, findings also suggest that justices exhibit differences in voting behavior while the appointing president is in office, and, surprisingly, that justices seem to grow more liberal in their voting behavior over time. Collectively, this information indicates that there are certain situations (such as case issues or time periods in a justice‘s tenure) in which Supreme Court justices are not entirely "independent" in their behavior. For those who cherish the ideal of judicial independence, this may be a deleterious development; conversely, for those who deride the expansive role that the Supreme Court may have taken in contemporary society, the implication of a link between democratic processes and voting outputs may be a sanguine pronouncement.
22
Moore, Amanda Brooke Walker. "Supremely critical understanding the Senate confirmation votes for Supreme Court justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito /." 2006. http://purl.galileo.usg.edu/uga%5Fetd/moore%5Famanda%5Fw%5F200612%5Fma.
Full text
23
Glennon, Colin Ross. "The Determinants of Supreme Court Decision-Making: An Ideal Point Analysis." 2011. http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1078.
Full textAbstract:
The relationships among governmental institutions are some of the most studied phenomena in political science. Yet these complex interactions remain largely unexplained due to the difficult task of developing accurate measures that lead to quantifiable tests that enhance explanation and prediction. This work centers on the interactions of United States Supreme Court justices with other political actors. The goal of this dissertation is to better understand the relationship between the Supreme Court and its institutional environment. In short, I ask: What factors affect Supreme Court justices’ voting decisions?
I approach this question from several different angles while making use of a unique dependent variable—Yearly Supreme Court justice ideal point. This variable is a variant of the ideal points calculated by Michael A. Bailey of Georgetown University (Bailey, 2007). My empirical models consider the effects of numerous independent variables on this dependent variable. One of the unique aspects of this study is that it considers the effects of a wide variety of factors purported to affect judicial behavior. There are four main theories of judicial decision-making, and my empirical analyses test notions exported from all of them. In designing and testing my models, I draw especially on the developing approach of new institutionalism—an approach to the study of judicial politics that emphasizes the influence of external, non-judicial political actors on judicial behavior. Ultimately this work will show what factors constrain the actions of Supreme Court justices and to what degree they do so. This research has many implications for larger theoretical concerns of political science, specifically formulating questions about the independence of the judiciary and contains relevant questions for democratic theory as well.