Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: An Analysis of Factors that Contribute to Institutional Decision-Making in Federal Courts and Redistricting Commissions

政治学博士论文研究：联邦法院和选区重划委员会机构决策的影响因素分析

• 批准号: 0617192
• 负责人: Daron Shaw
• 金额: $ 0.67万
• 依托单位: University of Texas at Austin
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2006
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2006-07-01 至 2007-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0617192&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Research; Political; Science

Guardians of Redistricting: Explaining decisions of courts and redistricting commissionsThis project investigates the decisions of federal judges and redistricting commissioners in the redistricting process. The project relies on interviews with federal judges and redistricting commissioners in order to determine how partisan considerations may or may not play a role in their decisions. This study is part of a larger research agenda that includes a dataset the principal investigator has gathered containing every published federal district court decision on redistricting from 1980 to the present, as well as a companion analysis of votes by commissioners on redistricting commissions. Interviews of no less than 150 federal judges were conducted around the country in the summer and fall of 2006, with many of them performed in person, and others by telephone or by mail. Many legal scholars assume that judges act as nonpartisan arbiters who simply referee legislatures redistricting actions. Many nonpartisan reform groups hold similar assumptions about the ability of redistricting commissions to both avoid partisan bickering and create plans that survive judicial scrutiny. But little research has been performed to see whether commissions or courts do in fact operate with nonpartisan alacrity. This study is unique in that no other research on judicial conduct in redistricting has attempted to utilize both interviews of judges and statistical analyses of redistricting court decisions. Nor has any research systematically measured partisan behavior in redistricting commissions. As past judicial research illustrates, interviews can provide a fuller framework for understanding court action. Furthermore, because little or no media accounts of redistricting commission operations exist, interviews of the commissioners themselves, and the documents they can point to that the commission generated, will be essential to both conducting an analysis of commission decisions and measuring the extent of partisan behavior. The study of government institutions responsible for redistricting oversight has never been more important than it is today. The partisan polarization that has marked recent elections and public policy disputes has spilled over into redistricting, creating acrimony and controversy in several states. Lawsuits and efforts to depoliticize the process continue unabated. The broader impact of this study is that it can provide states with an idea of how the alternatives to legislative redistricting operate. Determining the extent to which courts and commissions engage in partisan behavior has important implications for how states and/or the federal government decide on a process for line-drawing, which in turn, has a huge effect on who gets elected. This project should help us ascertain the role of partisanship in judicial behavior and commission behavior in redistricting.

重划选区的监护人：解释法院和选区重划委员会的决定这个项目调查了联邦法官和选区重划委员在选区重划过程中的决定。该项目依赖于与联邦法官和选区重划专员的访谈，以确定党派考虑如何可能或可能不会在他们的决定中发挥作用。这项研究是一个更大的研究议程的一部分，其中包括一个数据集的主要研究者已经收集了每一个出版的联邦地区法院决定重划从1980年到现在，以及一个同伴的分析投票委员会重划委员会。2006年夏季和秋季，在全国范围内对不少于150名联邦法官进行了访谈，其中许多人是亲自进行的，其他人则通过电话或邮件进行。许多法律的学者认为法官是无党派的仲裁者，他们只是裁判立法机关重新划分选区的行动。许多无党派的改革团体对重新划分委员会的能力持有类似的假设，既可以避免党派之争，又可以制定经得起司法审查的计划。但很少有人研究委员会或法院是否真的以无党派的敏捷方式运作。这项研究是独一无二的，因为没有其他研究在重新划分司法行为试图利用法官的访谈和重新划分法院判决的统计分析。也没有任何研究系统地衡量重新划分委员会的党派行为。正如过去的司法研究所表明的那样，访谈可以为理解法院行为提供更全面的框架。此外，由于很少或没有媒体报道重新划分委员会的运作，对委员们自己的采访，以及他们可以指向委员会产生的文件，对于分析委员会的决定和衡量党派行为的程度至关重要。对负责重新划分监督的政府机构的研究从未像今天这样重要。最近的选举和公共政策争端标志着党派两极分化，这已经蔓延到重新划分选区，在几个州造成了激烈的争吵和争议。诉讼和使这一进程非政治化的努力有增无减。这项研究的更广泛的影响是，它可以为各州提供一个想法，即立法重新划分的替代方案如何运作。确定法院和委员会参与党派行为的程度对州和/或联邦政府如何决定划界程序具有重要意义，这反过来又对谁当选产生巨大影响。这个项目应该帮助我们确定党派在司法行为和委员会行为中的作用。