Personal Attribute Models of the Voting Behavior of U.S. Supreme Court Justices: Liberalism in Civil Liberties and Economics Decisions, 1946–1978

Tate, C. Neal

doi:10.2307/1961370

Cited by 253 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

127

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, it is conceded by even the most fervent advocates of personal attribute theory that such indicators often provide only rough measures of judicial attitudes. Nevertheless, judicial attribute theory has been successfully used to demonstrate the existence of attitudinal voting on a number of courts including the Philippines Supreme Court, United States Supreme Court and its courts of appeals~Goldman, 1975;Tate, 1972Tate, , 1981 The use of judicial attributes as measures of judicial attitudes raises a problem that plagues much social science research. Many concepts that social scientists are interested in~for example, attitudes, power, prejudices, fear!…”

Section: The Judge Attribute Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Decision Making In the Supreme Court of Canada: Updating the Personal Attribute Model

Songer

Johnson

2007

CJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. This study seeks to add to the current understanding of the political nature of the Supreme Court of Canada. We analyze a data set consisting of all nonunanimous published Supreme Court decisions for the period 1949 to 2000. A prior study by Tate and Sittiwong (1989) suggested a model of judge attributes for the period 1949 to 1985. We build on that analysis by extending the time period to 2000, which allows the impact of gender also to be assessed. We find that since the Court gained substantial docket control, the types of cases the Court hears has changed from the period studied by Tate and Sittiwong. In the more recent period, civil rights and liberties cases are much more substantial in number. We conclude some of the variables in the Tate and Sittiwong study may be time bound and we suggest a new model of attitudinal voting.Résumé. Cet étude cherche de augmenter le savoir courant du le nature politique du Cour suprême du Canada. Nous analysons un ensemble de données non unanime compose de tout décisions publié du Cour suprême entre les années 1949 à 1985. Une enquête précède fait par Tate et Sittiwong (1989) a proposé un modèle des attributs des juges pour la période entre 1949 à 1985. Nous poursuivons laquelle analyse pour prolonger la période du temps jusqu'à 2000, ce que on permettre évalue l'effet du sexe aussi. Nous trouvons que comme le Cour a conquis considérable control du registre, les gendres dossier entendre par le Cour ont changé depuis le période de enquête de Tate y Sittiwong. Pendent le période plus récent les dossiers concernant les droits civiles et libertés sont beaucoup plus nombreux. Nous concluons que possiblement, quelques variables de l'enquête du Tate et Sittiwong soient liées par le temp et nous proposent un modèle neuf des votes attitudinal.

show abstract

Section: The Judge Attribute Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Decision Making In the Supreme Court of Canada: Updating the Personal Attribute Model

Songer

Johnson

2007

CJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Democrats are generally more willing to use the judiciary as a policymaking institution. The vast literature on judicial decisionmaking reaffirms this finding again and again (see Segal and Spaeth 1993;Goldman 1969;Tate 1981;Ulmer 1962Ulmer , 1973. Thus, we expect that Democratic attorneys general will be far less reluctant than their Republican counterparts to use the judicial system in innovative ways to pursue payoffs at the expense of large corporations.…”

Section: The Partisan Attorney Generalmentioning

confidence: 61%

Taking on Tobacco: Policy Entrepreneurship and the Tobacco Litigation

Spill

Licari

Ray

2001

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The retrenchment of the federal government and the deregulation of many industries, beginning in the 1980s, afforded state elected officials opportunities for policy entrepreneurship. In particular, state attorneys general began to create policy The recent high profile tobacco litigation demonstrates the use of this oft-overlooked office for policy innovation. The legal effort initiated by the states against the tobacco industry sheds light on the role of the state attorney general in our federal system. While much of the literature on state politics continues to debate and examine the influence of the governor on policy innovation and diffusion, our study provides a clear example of policy innovation independent of the governor. Our event history analysis supports critiques of the field of state politics that note the lack of attention to other actors and the context surrounding state policy development. We find that the attorney general is an innovator in her own right, motivated by partisan self interest and working within the constraints of her role. Crises and events clearly mobilized activity among the attorneys general. The state attorneys general succeeded in creating a new national tobacco policy through litigation and these actors demand closer attention as policy entrepreneurs. Although the American system of federalism creates numerous potential policymakers, as scholars we often focus on a small number of these actors. However, the need to broaden the scope of our research has increased in recent decades. Opportunities for policy entrepreneurship at the state level expanded in the wake of the retrenchment of the federal government and the deregulation of many industries, beginning in the 1980s. (Derthick 1986;Nathan and Doolittle 1987;Conlan 1991). State officials, acting in concert, began to fill the void left by the federal government. Scholars of state government have focused primarily

show abstract

“…The problems with the SETUPS data have more serious implications when they are used for research purposes. The substantial differences between the SETUPS data and the Harvard Law Review data for the Burger Court years lead to the conclusion that the SETUPS data should not be used for research purposes and the results of previously published studies using these data should be questioned (e.g., Brenner and Arlington 1983;Tate 1981;Weber 1984).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%