The Politics of Dissents and Concurrences on the U.S. Supreme Court

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 488-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
PAUL J. WAHLBECK ◽  
JAMES F. SPRIGGS ◽  
FORREST MALTZMAN
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Logit Model ◽  
Multinomial Logit Model ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Institutional Constraints ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Burger Court ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Individual Justice ◽  
The U.S

Why do justices author or join separate opinions? Most attempts to address the dynamics of concurrence and dissent focus on aggregate patterns across time or courts. In contrast, we explain why an individual justice chooses to author or join a separate opinion. We argue that separate opinions result from justices' pursuit of their policy preferences within both strategic and institutional constraints. Using data from the Burger Court (1969 to 1985 terms), we estimate a multinomial logit model to test the influence of these factors on justices' decisions to join or author a regular concurrence, a special concurrence, or a dissent, as opposed to joining the majority opinion. Our results show that this choice reflects the justices' conditional pursuit of their policy preferences. We also disentangle the decision to join or author separate opinions, and we find that the latter decision is also influenced by the time remaining in the Court's term.

scholarly journals Customers’ Mode Choice Behaviors of Express Service Based on Latent Class Analysis and Logit Model

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lian Lian ◽  
Shuo Zhang ◽  
Zhong Wang ◽  
Kai Liu ◽  
Lihuan Cao
Keyword(s):  
Logit Model ◽  
Choice Behavior ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Latent Class Model ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Multinomial Logit Model ◽  
Class Model ◽  
Taste Heterogeneity ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Service Choice

As the parcel delivery service is booming in China, the competition among express companies intensifies. This paper employed multinomial logit model (MNL) and latent class model (LCM) to investigate customers’ express service choice behavior, using data from a SP survey. The attributes and attribute levels that matter most to express customers are identified. Meanwhile, the customers are divided into two segments (penny pincher segment and high-end segment) characterized by their taste heterogeneity. The results indicate that the LCM performs statistically better than MNL in our sample. Therefore, more attention should be paid to the taste heterogeneity, especially for further academic and policy research in freight choice behavior.

scholarly journals Identifying Factors Influencing a Hospital's Decision to Adopt a Farm-to-Hospital Program

2013 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 508-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bobby J. Smith ◽  
Harry M. Kaiser ◽  
Miguel I. Gómez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Logit Model ◽  
Food Service ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Applied Economics ◽  
Northeastern United States ◽  
Department Of Agriculture ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The U.S

Farm-to-hospital (FTH) programs can potentially improve the economy of local communities and preserve the environment. Research on adoption of farm-to-hospital (FTH) programs is extremely limited in the agricultural and applied economics literature. Using data from our 2012 regional FTH program survey of hospital food-service directors in the Northeastern United States and from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, this study estimates a logit model to determine factors that influence a hospital's decision to adopt an FTH program. The empirical results indicate that specific hospital characteristics and agricultural factors significantly influence a hospital's decision to adopt.

Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 1109-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Caldeira ◽  
John R. Wright
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Organized Interests ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Selection Of

Participation as amicus curiae has long been an important tactic of organized interests in litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court. We analyze amicus curiae briefs filed before the decision on certiorari and assess their impact on the Court's selection of a plenary docket. We hypothesize that one or more briefs advocating or opposing certiorari increase the likelihood of its being granted. We test this hypothesis using data from the United States Reports and Briefs and Records of the United States Supreme Court for the 1982 term. The statistical analysis demonstrates that the presence of amicus curiae briefs filed prior to the decision on certiorari significantly and positively increases the chances of the justices' binding of a case over for full treatment—even after we take into account the full array of variables other scholars have hypothesized or shown to be substantial influences on the decision to grant or deny.

scholarly journals Agenda Control, the Median Justice, and the Majority Opinion on the U.S. Supreme Court

2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 890-905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris W. Bonneau ◽  
Thomas H. Hammond ◽  
Forrest Maltzman ◽  
Paul J. Wahlbeck
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Agenda Control ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Median Justice ◽  
The U.S

Measuring Policy Change in the U.S. Supreme Court

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 905-920 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Baum
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Policy Change ◽  
Building Block ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Burger Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Warren Court ◽  
Measure Change ◽  
The U.S

Measuring the U.S. Supreme Court's policy changes is complicated by change in the content of the cases that come before the Court. I adapt from earlier scholarship a method to correct for changes in case content and use this method to measure change in the Court's support for civil liberties in the 1946–85 terms. Analysis based on this method indicates that because of changes in case content, the average difficulty of reaching a pro-civil liberties result varied during that period. With corrections for case difficulty, the Warren Court of the 1950s appears to have been more conservative, and the Burger Court more liberal, than patterns of case outcomes themselves suggest. This method, while imperfect, has utility for the measurement of policy change in the Supreme Court and other institutions and thus can serve as a building block in analyses of the processes and determinants of change.

Lawyers, Organized Interests, and the Law of Obscenity: Agenda Setting in the Supreme Court

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 717-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin T. McGuire ◽  
Gregory A. Caldeira
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Agenda Building ◽  
Organized Interests ◽  
Critical Elements ◽  
Burger Court ◽  
Case Selection ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Warren Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Using Data

Each year thousands of cases and litigants come to the Supreme Court. How can the Court find the most important cases to decide? The law of obscenity illustrates particularly well the Court's problem as it constructs its plenary agenda. Using data drawn from petitions for certiorari and jurisdictional statements filed with the Supreme Court from 1955 to 1987, we formulate and test a model of case selection in which professional obscenity lawyers and organized interests figure as critical elements in the process of agenda building. We also encounter strong evidence of the Court's differential treatment of several different litigants. Moreover, the calculus of selection changed markedly over time, as the Court itself changed; the Burger Court and Warren Court weighed several of the criteria quite differently.

Supreme Court Decision Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Edited by Cornell W. Clayton and Howard Gillman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. 344p. $55.00 cloth, $19.00 paper.

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 210-212
Author(s):  
Michael McCann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Collective Response ◽  
Recent Scholarship ◽  
Institutional Contexts ◽  
University Of Chicago Press ◽  
The U.S

The editors of this timely volume announce at the outset that their aim is to provide a forum for recent scholarship that reacts critically to the previous generation of behavioralists who, since the 1950s, have analyzed the U.S. Supreme Court as little more than an aggregate of the relatively stable and identifiable policy preferences held by individual justices. Specifically, these essays pose a collective "response by a succeeding generation of Supreme Court scholars who are trained in political behavioralism but who have rediscovered the value and importance of understanding institutional contexts" (p. 12).

Confucianism and Same-Sex Marriage

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Tongdong Bai
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
The United States ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Confucian Values ◽  
The U.S

Abstract In the majority opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court over same-sex marriage, a claim by Confucius was quoted, which led to an uproar among Confucian scholars in mainland China. In this article, I will first explain the background of the debate over same-sex marriage in the United States, and why Confucius's claim was quoted. I will then show how a contemporary Confucian philosopher Zhang Xianglong addressed the issue of same-sex marriage from a Confucian perspective. In my view, compared with other mainland Confucians' responses, Zhang's are one of the most scholarly and moderate responses that nevertheless follow Confucian values. But he eventually rejected same-sex marriage on the Confucian ground. I will argue that, based on some Confucian values and principles which are shared by Zhang, we can answer Zhang's concerns with same-sex marriage, thus offering an even more moderate Confucian stance that accepts same-sex marriage. But this stance is still different from the typical liberal one. We will also see that, in order to accept same-sex marriage, it is the liberals, not the Confucians, who will have to deal with an issue—the acceptance of polygamy—that poses a serious challenge to the principle of equality, which is fundamental to some liberals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document