The Judicial Common Space

The Judicial Common Space
复制标题

司法公共空间

DOI:
--
复制
发表时间:
2007
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Chad Westerland
Chad Westerland
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
L. Epstein;Andrew D. Martin;J. Segal;Chad Westerland

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

如果说关于正义等级的实证政治理论(PPT)学术是理论丰富而数据贫乏的,那就是提出一个相当没有争议的主张。十多年来,学者们提供了有趣的理论解释,旨在理解为什么下级法院违抗(遵守)上级法院。但他们很少对这些账户进行严格的实证调查。主要障碍似乎是缺乏一个可靠和有效的衡量战略,将下级法院法官和上级法院法官置于同一政策空间。如果没有这样的策略,我们可以系统地测试几个,如果有的话,假设从PPT模型的司法等级。通过这种方法,我们不仅可以研究这些模型的含义,我们还可以评估来自更大的PPT程序的许多其他判断。我们在这篇文章中谈到的是对法官和大法官(以及立法机构和行政机构)的挑战。我们开始通过解释我们的测量策略,然后通过解释它的优点比以前的努力。接下来,我们探索我们的方法的结果,并提供一个描述性的数据,它产生:司法共同空间(JCS)得分为所有法官和法官自1953年以来任命。最后一节提供了三个应用程序,旨在海岸的适用性和适应性的JCS的一系列积极的项目在球场上。
To say that positive political theory (PPT) scholarship on the hierarchy of justice is theory rich and data poor is to make a rather uncontroversial claim. For over a decade now, scholars have offered intriguing theoretical accounts aimed at understanding why lower courts defy (comply with) higher courts. But only rarely do they subject the accounts to rigorous empirical interrogation. The chief obstacle, it seems, is the lack of a reliable and valid measurement strategy for placing judges of lower courts and justices of higher courts in the same policy space. Without such a strategy, we can systematically test few, if any, hypotheses flowing from PPT models of the judicial hierarchy. With such an approach not only can we investigate the implications of these models, we can assess many others flowing from the larger PPT program on judging, as well. It is to the challenge of scaling judges and justices (as well as legislatures and executives) that we turn in this article. We begin by explicating our measurement strategy, and then by explaining its advantages over previous efforts. Next we explore the results of our approach and provide a descriptive look at data it yields: a Judicial Common Space (JCS) score for all justices and judges appointed since 1953. The last section offers three applications designed to shore up the suitability and adaptability of the JCS for a range of positive projects on the courts.