Estimating Judicial Ideology

Bonica, Adam; Sen, Maya

doi:10.1257/jep.35.1.97

Cited by 33 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This type of polarization is typically operationalized as approaching or arriving at a bimodal distribution of beliefs, opinions and values 50 , 72 . This implies either that two groups — such as liberals and conservatives or leftists and rightists — are moving in opposite, more extreme directions (symmetric polarization) or that one group is becoming more extreme than the other (asymmetric polarization 10 , 34 , 47 , 48 , 73 – 75 ).…”

Section: Types Of Mass Political Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Those who endorse liberal and conservative attitudes exhibit ego- and group-justifying biases favouring themselves and the groups to which they belong, contributing to symmetric forms of polarization 99 , 140 . However, they differ in terms of system-justifying (versus system-challenging) motives, which might help to explain asymmetric polarization 10 , 34 , 47 , 48 , 73 , 74 .…”

Section: Cognitive–motivational Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These differences in beliefs, opinions and values might well create asymmetries in all three forms of polarization, but more research is needed to link individual and group differences in system justification to political outcomes such as communication, persuasion, polarization and democratic commitment. Studies along these lines would help to illuminate the causes and consequences of dramatic asymmetries in the attitudes and behaviours of liberal-leftists and conservative-rightists in the USA and elsewhere 10 , 34 , 47 , 48 , 73 – 75 , 161 , 167 , 185 – 187 , 310 – 315 .…”

Section: Summary and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has clear relevance to politics, which often involves group-level competition over policy issues and/or ideologies. For example, there is a strong consensus among scholars of politics in the USA that liberal and conservative political elites (including members of Congress, party activists, donors and judicial appointees) have grown increasingly polarized over the past few decades 27 – 34 . At the same time, the extent to which elite-level polarization has influenced the belief systems of ordinary citizens remains a matter of debate 8 , 27 , 35 – 40 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts

Jost

Baldassarri²,

Druckman³

2022

Nat Rev Psychol

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthy democratic polities feature competing visions of a good society but also require some level of cooperation and institutional trust. Democracy is at risk when citizens become so polarized that an ‘us versus them’ mentality dominates. Despite a vast multidisciplinary literature, no coherent conceptual framework of the microlevel dynamics that increase or decrease polarization has been presented. In this Review, we provide a conceptual framework to integrate scientific knowledge about cognitive–motivational mechanisms that influence political polarization and the social-communicative contexts in which they are enacted. Ego-justifying and group-justifying motives lead individuals to defend their own pre-existing beliefs and those of their in-group, respectively. However, a distinct class of system-justifying motives contributes to asymmetric forms of polarization. Whereas conservative-rightist ideology is associated with valuing tradition, social order and maintenance of the status quo, liberal-leftist ideology is associated with a push for egalitarian social change. These cognitive–motivational mechanisms interact with social influence processes linked to communication source, message and channel factors, all of which might contribute to increased or decreased polarization. We conclude with a discussion of unanswered questions and ways in which our framework can be extended to the study of culture and institutions.

show abstract

Section: Types Of Mass Political Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cognitive–motivational Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Summary and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts

Jost

Baldassarri²,

Druckman³

2022

Nat Rev Psychol

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, consistent with the common practice of using appointing president's party as a proxy for judicial ideology (see Bonica & Sen, 2021), we created a Democratic Appointee variable that reflects whether an IJ was appointed during a Democratic presidential administration. Following Miller et al's approach (Miller et al, 2015b) of transforming IJs' work experience indicators into an index measure of their "asylum liberalism," we combined Work Experience and Democratic Appointee variables using factor analysis on a polychoric matrix.…”

Section: Judge Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Ryo

Peacock

2021

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial research and policymaking have focused on the importance of lawyers in ensuring access to civil justice. But do lawyers matter more in cases decided by certain types of judges than others? Do lawyers matter more in certain political, legal, and organizational contexts than others? We explore these questions by investigating removal proceedings in the United States—a court process in which immigration judges decide whether to admit noncitizens into the United States or deport them. Drawing on over 1.9 million removal proceedings decided between 1998 and 2020, we examine whether the representation effect (the increased probability of a favorable outcome associated with legal representation) depends on judge characteristics and contextual factors. We find that the representation effect is larger among female (than male) judges and among more experienced judges. In addition, the representation effect is larger during Democratic presidential administrations, in immigration courts located in the Ninth Circuit, and in times of increasing caseload. These findings suggest that the representation effect depends on who the judge is and their decisional environment, and that increasing noncitzens' access to counsel—even of high quality—might be insufficient under current circumstances to ensure fair and consistent outcomes in immigration courts.

show abstract

Economic nationalism and the home court advantage

Choudhury,

Jandhyala,

Nandkumar

2024

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research SummaryPolitical and regulatory actors routinely adopt or enforce policies to protect domestic firms at the expense of foreign firms. However, since courts are expected to be neutral and act independently, a question arises whether (and why) they discriminate against foreign firms. We argue that the courts are nationalistic, which emanates from judges differentiating between in‐group (domestic) and out‐group (foreign) members. In a sample of 58,754 patent disputes adjudicated by US federal district courts between 1983 and 2016, we find domestic patent holders and challengers are more successful than their foreign counterparts. Rulings involving foreign firms are more likely to exhibit nationalistic rhetoric. Judicial ideology moderates the differential odds of success between domestic and foreign firms. Thus, the legal system is another source of economic nationalism.Managerial SummaryMultinational firms might face a disadvantage relative to domestic firms because politicians and regulators are nationalistic; they routinely adopt policies that favor domestic firms. If courts are neutral, this disadvantage should not exist in litigation between multinational and domestic firms. On the contrary, if courts are also nationalistic, domestic firms should enjoy an advantage and greater success than multinational firms in judicial verdicts. Using data on patent disputes in the United States observed over a 33‐year period, we find domestic patent holders and challengers are more successful than their foreign counterparts suggesting that the legal system is another source of economic nationalism. Rulings involving multinationals are more likely to exhibit nationalistic rhetoric. Judicial ideology moderates the differential odds of success between domestic and multinational firms.

show abstract

Estimating Judicial Ideology

Cited by 33 publications

References 37 publications

Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts

Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts

Represented but unequal: The contingent effect of legal representation in removal proceedings

Economic nationalism and the home court advantage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About