Course Objectives

Over the last fifty years, courts everywhere have been settling significant and politically salient public policy issues. It is well known that the U.S. Supreme Court has been active in making policy in many different areas, such as abortion and contraception, criminal rights, and discrimination. The Italian Supreme Court has made significant headway in changing the nature of the relationship between government and the economy. The German Federal Constitutional Court has settled cases regarding an enormous number of issues having to do with the reunification process, including abortion. English courts have declared that England has an “implied” constitution and have been busy protecting rights implied by it. In Canada, the high court ruled on questions concerning federalism and women’s rights, including ensuring access to federally funded day care, and permitting the regulation of pornography because it harms women. Even in countries as distinct as India, the Philippines, Namibia and Israel, courts have participated in making policy that are important to citizens’ everyday lives. There is little debate that courts are increasingly vital to political outcomes across the world; scholars have argued that the judicialization of politics may be one of the most significant political phenomena of the twentieth century.

Given the expansion of the political power of judiciaries around the world, the United States Supreme Court is no longer perceived as unique in the nature of its political character. Therefore, a systematic understanding of how courts participate in the political process and how they affect political outcomes in the U.S. is increasingly important, not only to understand American politics, but also to understand these global trends. In this course, you will be presented with an overview of the American judicial system, as well as some issues of law and politics outside the United States. In this course, we will discuss: courts’ roles in the democratic system; the organization of the judicial system, civil and criminal trials, public opinion about the courts; how Supreme Court justices make their decisions; how interest groups affect the judicial process and the implications of this effect for judicial policy making, and the inter-institutional conflict between courts and other institutions.

Just to give a quick and brief overview, we have four primary dependent variables in the study on the American Supreme Court – 1) what causes the decision on the merits, 2) what causes the decision to take the case, 3) what causes justices to get selected to the courts? and 4) what causes people to think the way they do about the Court?

All four questions have implications for the relationship between the judiciary and other aspects of American politics. The first three questions have implications for understanding judicial independence from other institutions and its ability to protect minorities from majoritarian institutions. Moreover, the public is the source of judicial power; when people are supportive of the institutional sanctity of the court, then other institutions have an incentive to enforce Court decisions. With regard to lower courts, the questions are much the same, but also included is what causes people or groups to participate in litigation.

Other questions in the field of judicial politics can be characterized as “how much” questions. How much impact do Supreme Court cases have? How much do courts challenge majoritarian institutions? How often do Supreme Court justices (or other courts’ judges) consider the preferences of other actors? How much litigation is there?

Outside of the United States, the questions are again similar – what causes judges and justices to make the decisions that they do, and what causes them to deal with the issues that they deal with. There are also questions about what causes people to use their judicial system – because that has an impact on the kinds of questions that reach judiciaries. Because of institutional variation, there are different kinds of answers to those questions, but the foundation of what is interesting to students of judicial institutions are the same: the question is what causes judiciaries to be powerful, or to implement their preferences into policy that affect who gets what in the political system.

Course Requirements and Grading

Your grade is based on the quality of your contribution to the body of knowledge in judicial politics. Each student is expected to contribute to our understanding of the literature in the seminar sessions. Each student’s research project or proposal should represent a significant contribution to the literature. Evaluation in this course will be based on the following components:

Participation in Class 25%

Critical Reviews 25%

Research Paper 50%

Participation: Students are responsible for making the seminar a successful one; you are responsible for one another’s (and the professor’s) education. Additionally, students will be responsible for leading class discussions on a specific number of days (to be determined by the instructor during the first week). Both components are evaluated to determine the participation grade.

Critical Reviews: On days in which the student is responsible for leading the discussion, he/she will also submit a critical review of the readings, not to exceed five pages of text. While there is a good deal of flexibility for the content of these essays, they should not merely be a summary or a literature review of the readings. Rather, a critical review essay must critically evaluate the literature, such that one points out both the positive and negative aspects of the various readings, discuss common or disparate themes, how the scholarship advanced (or failed to advance) our knowledge, how the research could have been improved, etc. Again, this is NOT a summary of the research. Rather, the review is a detailed assessment of the readings, delving deeper into the theoretical and methodological issues. The format should follow the format of a book review, even when the review is of several articles.

Research Paper: Students will complete one of the following: 1) an empirical research paper suitable for presentation at a professional political science conference, or 2) a research proposal that would be suitable for a request to a funding agency to get your empirical research funded. By the end of the first month, each student must submit a 1-2 page research proposal that includes a detailed research question describing the analysis, and a description of the research design (including methodology) employed to analyze the question. After submission of the research proposal, we will spend time in class evaluating the proposals. The final draft is due toward the end of the semester, and students will present their papers before an audience (consisting both of the class members and the department) where they will receive feedback on the analysis.

Special Needs

Students with special needs are advised to contact the instructor immediately. Every effort to accommodate special needs will be made.

Academic Dishonesty

Absolutely no form of academic dishonesty will be tolerated. Anyone found guilty of cheating, plagiarism, or any other violation of academic integrity will receive an automatic grade of F for the course. Additionally, all other available penalties within the University will be pursued to the fullest extent.

Pre-Semester Recommended Reading

For those individuals who have not had an undergraduate course on judicial politics or the U.S. Supreme Court, I recommend you read through the following books.

Baum, Lawrence. 2004. The Supreme Court, Eighth Edition. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Epstein, Lee. 1995. Contemplating Courts. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Murphy, Walter F., C. Herman Pritchett and Lee Epstein. 2002. Courts, Judges and Politics: an introduction to the judicial process. Boston: McGraw Hill.

If you are new to political science and have not taken the Introduction to Data Analysis required course for first year graduate students, then the following book is required reading:

King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.

Week 1 Introduction. 4

Week 2 Setting The Judicial Agenda. 7

Week 3 Litigation. 9

Week 4 Role of Law in Politics. 13

Week 5 Decision-Making: The Attitudinal Model 15

Week 6 Decision Making: The Legal model 22

Week 7 Decision Making: the Strategic Models. 24

Week 8 Report on Papers. 40

Week 9 Separation of Powers in Comparative Context 40

Week 10 Judicial Selection. 41

Week 11 Interest Groups. 47

Week 12 The Effect of Public Opinion on the Supreme Court and Vice Versa. 48

Week 13 Legitimacy. 51

Week 14 Judicial Independence in Comparative Perspective. 51

Week 15 Judicial Impact 52

Week 16 Intercourt Relations. 55

ADDITIONAL TOPICS OF INTEREST.. 55

Week 1 Introduction

Required

Epstein, Lee and Jack Knight. 2000. "Field Essay: Toward a Strategic Revolution in Judicial Politics: A Look Back, A Look Ahead." Political Research Quarterly 53 (September): 625-661.

Gibson, James. 1983. “From Simplicity to Complexity: The Development of Theory in the Study of Judicial Behavior.” 5 Political Behavior 7-49.

Shapiro, Martin. 1993. “Public Law and Judicial Politics.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, II, ed. Ada W. Finifter. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.

Smith, Rogers. 1988. "Political Jurisprudence, the 'New Institutionalism,' and the Future of Public Law," 82 American Political Science Review 89-108.

Research Resources

Benesh, Sarah. 2002. “Becoming an Intelligent User of the Spaeth Supreme Court Databases.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Political Science Association. New Orleans, LA.

Contemplating Courts, Appendices A- C

Epstein, Lee, et. al. 2003. The Supreme Court Compendium: Data, Decisions, Developments. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Spaeth, Harold J. 1997. Codebook to the Supreme Court Data Base (skim)
Gibson, James L. 1997. Codebook to Phase Two of the Supreme Court Data Base, Amicus Curiae Data

Click Here for Timothy Johnson (Minnesota) Additional Sources/Reference Material on the Supreme Court

Some older literature

Fellman, David. 1952-1961. “Constitutional Law in [Years].” American Political Science Review 55(March): 112-135; 54(June): 474-493; 54(March): 167-199; 53(March): 138-180; 52(March): 140-191; 51(March): 158-196; 50(March): 43-100; 49(March): 63-106; 48(March): 63-113; 47(March): 126-170; 46(March): 158-199.

Harris, Robert J. 1950-1951. “Constitutional Law in [Years].” American Political Science Review 45(March): 86-109; 44(March): 23-46.

Fellman, David. 1949. “Constitutional Law in 1947-48: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1947.” American Political Science Review 43(April): 275-308.

Grant, J.A.C. 1948. “‘Contract Clause’ Litigation in Colombia; A Comparative Study in Judicial Review.” American Political Science Review 42(December): 1103-1126.

Grant, J.A.C. 1947. “Due Process for Ex-Dictators; A Study of Judicial Control of Legislation in Guatemala.” American Political Science Review 41(June): 463-469.

Fairman, Charles. 1942. “Judicial Attitudes Toward State-Federal Relations.” American Political Science Review 36(October): 880-885.

Shoup, Earl L. 1936. “Judicial Abrogation of County Home Rule in Ohio.” American Political Science Review 30(June): 540-546.

Martin, Edward M. 1936. “The Selection of Judges in Chicago, and the Role of the Local Bar Therein.” American Political Science Review 30(April): 315-323.

Aikin, Charles. 1935. “A New Method of Selecting Judges in California.” American Political Science Review 29(June): 472-474.

Cushman, Robert E. 1925-1948. “Constitutional Law in [Years]: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, [Year].” American Political Science Review 42(June): 469-485; 41(April): 248-270; 40(April): 231-255; 39(April): 293-308; 38(April): 266-288; 37(April): 263-289; 36(April): 263-289; 35(April): 250-283; 34(April): 249-283; 33(April): 234-266; 32(April): 278-310; 31(April): 253-279; 30(February): 51-89; 29(February): 36-59; 28(February): 40-64; 27(February): 39-57; 26(April): 256-284; 25(February): 73-102; 24(February): 67-103; 23(February): 78-101; 22(February): 70-107; 21(February): 71-94; 20(February): 80-106; 19(February): 51-68.

Corwin, Edward S. 1920-1924. “Constitutional Law in [Years]: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, [Year].” American Political Science Review 18(February): 49-78; 16(November): 612-639; 16(May): 228-244; 16(February): 22-40; 15(February): 52-70; 14(November): 635-658.

Week 2 Setting The Judicial Agenda

Required

Baird book Chapter 1 Chapter 7

Epp, Charles R. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, chapters 1, 2, 5, 6.

Shipan, Charles R. and Kenneth W. Moffett. Liberal Justices, Conservative Cases? Explaining the Ideological Nature of the Supreme Court’s Agenda. Unpublished manuscript.

Rule 10 of the Supreme Court

Segal, Jeffrey A. and Harold J. Spaeth. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 6.

Week 3 Litigation

Required

Baird and Javeline. 2004. Judicial Pioneers:Litigants in the Moscow Theater Hostage Case.

Blankenburg, Erhard. 1994. “The Infrastructure for Avoiding Civil Litigation: Comparing Cultures of Legal Behavior in the Netherlands and West Germany,” Law and Society Review 28 (December):789-808.

Johnson, Timothy R. 2001. “Information, Oral Arguments, and Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Politics Research 29(July): 331-351.

McGuire, Kevin T. 1995. “Repeat Players in the Supreme Court: The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success.” Journal of Politics 57(February): 187-196.

Micheal W. Giles and Thomas Lancaster, "Political Transition, Social Development, and Legal Mobilization in Spain ," American Political Science Review, 83

Hendley, Kathryn, Peter Murrell, and Randi Ryterman. 2003. “Do Repeat Players Behave Differently in Russia? Contractual and Litigation Behavior of Russian Enterprises.” In Herbert M. Kritzer and Susan Silbey, eds. In Litigation: Do the “Haves” Still Come Out Ahead? Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Hendley, Kathryn. 1996. Trying to Make Law Matter: Legal Reform and Labor Law in the Soviet Union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Hendley, Kathryn. 2001. “‘Demand’ for Law in Russia—A Mixed Picture,” East European Constitutional Review 10 (fall):73-78.

Hendley, Kathryn. 2002. "Suing the State in Russia," Post-Soviet Affairs 18 (April-June):122-147.

Hensler, Deborah R., M.Susan Marquis, Allan F. Abrahamse, Sandra H. Berry, Patricia A. Ebener, Elizabeth Lewis, E.Allan Lind, Robert J. MacCoun, Willard G. Manning, Jeannette A. Rogowski, and Mary E. Vaiana. 1991. Compensation for Accidental Injuries in the United States. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.

Hunting, Roger B., and Gloria S. Neuwirth. 1962. Who Sues in New York City? A Study of Automobile Accident Claims. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kearney, Richard C., and Reginald S. Sheehan. 1992. “Supreme Court Decision Making: The Impact of Court Composition on State and Local Government Litigation.” Journal of Politics 54(November): 1008-1025.

Kritzer, Herbert M. 1989. A Comparative Perspective on Settlement and Bargaining in Personal Injury Cases. Law & Social Inquiry 14(1):167-85.

Kritzer, Herbert M. 1990. The Justice Broker: Lawyers and Ordinary Litigation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kritzer, Herbert M. 1991. “Propensity to Sue in England and the United States of America: Blaming and Claiming in Tort Cases,” Journal of Law and Society 18 (4):400-427.

Kritzer, Herbert M. 2001. “Litigation.” International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol.13:8989-8995.

Kritzer, Herbert M. and John Voelker. 1998. “Familiarity Breeds Respect: How Wisconsin Citizens View Their Courts,” Judicature 82 (2):58-64.

Kritzer, Herbert M. and Susan Silbey, eds. 2003. In Litigation: Do the “Haves” Still Come Out Ahead? Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Kritzer, Herbert M., W.A. Bogart, and Neil Vidmar. 1991. “Context, Context, Context: A Cross-Problem, Cross-Culture Comparison of Compensation Seeking Behavior,” paper prepared for Law and Society, Amsterdam.

Lawrence, Susan E. 1989. “Legal Services before the Supreme Court.” Judicature 72(February/March): 266-273.

Lowenstein, George F., Sam Issacharoff, Colin Camerer, and Linda Babcock. 1993. “Self-serving Assessments of Pretrial Bargaining,” Journal of Legal Studies 22 (January):135-159.

Macaulay, Stewart. 1963. “Non-contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study,” American Sociological Review 28 (February):55-67.

Mather, Lynn. 1990. Dispute Processing and a Longitudinal Approach to Courts. Law & Society Review 24(2):357-70.

May, Marlynn L. and Daniel B. Stengel. 1990. “Who Sues Their Doctors? How Patients Handle Medical Grievances,” Law and Society Review 24 (February):105-120.

McGuire, Kevin T. 1993. “Lawyers and the U.S. Supreme Court: The Washington Community and Legal Elites.” American Journal of Political Science 37(May): 365-390.

McGuire, Kevin T. 1993. The Supreme Court Bar: Legal Elites in the Washington Community. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.

McGuire, Kevin T., and Barbara Palmer. 1995. “Issue Fluidity on the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 89(September): 691-702.

McGuire, Kevin T., and Barbara Palmer. 1996. “Issues, Agendas, and Decision Making on the Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 90(December): 853-865.

McIntosh, Wayne V. 1983. “Private Use of a Public Forum: A Long Range View of the Dispute Processing Role of Courts.” American Political Science Review 77(December): 991-1010.

McIntosh, Wayne. 1983. “Private Use of a Public Forum: A Long-Range View of the Dispute Processing Role of Courts,” American Political Science Review 77 (December):991-1010.

McNulty, Molly. 1989. “Are Poor Patients Likely to Sue for Malpractice?,” Journal of the American Medical Association 262 (September):1391-2.

Miller, Richard E., and Austin Sarat. 1980-1. “Grievances, Claims, and Disputes: Assessing the Adversary Culture,” Law and Society Review 15(3-4):525-566.

Morgan, Pheobe A. 1999. “Risking Relationships: Understanding the Litigation Choices of Sexually Harassed Women,” Law and Society Review 33 (March):67-92.

Mullis, Jeffery. 1995. “Medical Malpractice, Social Structure, and Social Control,” Sociological Forum 10 (March):135-163.

Munger, Frank. 1990. Afterword: Studying Litigation and Social Change. Law & Society Review 24(2):595-616.

Munger, Frank. 1990. Trial Courts and Social Change: The Evolution of a Field of Study. Law & Society Review 24(2):217-26.

O’Brien, Kevin J. and Lianjiang Li. 2004. “Suing the Local State: Administrative Litigation in Rural China,” China Journal 51 (January):75-96.

Ocko, Jonathon K. 1988. “I’ll Take It All the Way to Beijing: Capital Appeals in the Qing,” The Journal of Asian Studies 47(May):291-315.

Olson, Susan. 1995. Comparing women's rights litigation in the Netherlands and the United States . Polity v 28 Winter 1995. p. 189-215

Orren, Karen. 1976. “Standing to Sue: Interest Group Conflict in the Federal Courts.” American Political Science Review 70(September): 723-741.

Palmer, Barbara. 1999. “Issue Fluidity and Agenda Setting on the Warren Court.” Political Research Quarterly 52(March): 39-65.

Rathjen, Gregory J., and Harold J. Spaeth. 1979. “Access to the Federal Courts: An Analysis of Burger Court Policy Making.” American Journal of Political Science 23(May): 360-382.

Sarat, Austin, and Joel B. Grossman. 1975. “Courts and Conflict Resolution: Problems in the Mobilization of Adjudication.” American Political Science Review 69(December): 1200-1217.

Scheppele, Kim, and Jack Walker. 1991. “The Litigation Strategies of Interest Groups.” In Mobilizing Interest Groups in America. Jack Walker, ed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press: 335-372.

Sheehan, Reginald S. 1992. “Federal Agencies and the Supreme Court.” American Politics Quarterly 20(October): 478-500.

Sheehan, Reginald S. 1992. “Governmental Litigants, Underdogs, and Civil Liberties: A Reassessment of a Trend in Supreme Court Decisionmaking.” Western Political Quarterly 45(March): 27-39.

Sheehan, Reginald S. 1990. “Administrative Agencies and the Court: A Reexamination of the Impact of Agency Type on Decisional Outcomes.” Western Political Quarterly 43(December): 875-885.

Sheehan, Reginald S., William Mishler, and Donald R. Songer. 1992. “Ideology, Status, and the Differential Success of Direct Parties before the Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 86(June): 464-471.

Sloan, Frank A. and Chee Ruey Hsieh. 1995. “Injury, Liability, and the Decision to File a Medical Malpractice Claim,” Law and Society Review 29 (September):413-435.

Songer, Donald R., and Reginald S. Sheehan. 1992. “Who Wins on Appeal? Upperdogs and Underdogs in the United States Courts of Appeals.” American Journal of Political Science 36(February): 235-258.

Tanenhaus, Joseph. 1960. “Supreme Court Attitudes Toward Federal Administrative Agencies.” Journal of Politics 22(August): 502-524.

Trubek, David M., Joel B. Grossman, William L.F. Felstiner, Herbert M. Kritzer, and Austin Sarat. 1983. Civil Litigation Research Project Final Report. Madison: University of Wisconsin Law School.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1982. “Issue Fluidity in the U.S. Supreme Court: A Conceptual Analysis.” In Supreme Court Activism and Restraint, ed. Stephen C. Halpern and Charles M. Lamb. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1985. “Governmental Litigants, Underdogs, and Civil Liberties in the Supreme Court: 1903-1968 Terms.” Journal of Politics 47(August): 899-909.

van Loon, F. and E. Langerwerf. 1990. Development and the Evolution of Litigation Rates of Civil Courts in Belgium, 1835-1980. Law & Society Review 24(2):283-98.

Wheeler, Stanton, Bliss Cartwright , Robert A. Kagan, and Lawrence M. Friedman. 1987. “Do the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead? Winning and Losing in State Supreme Courts, 1870-1970.” Law and Society Review 21(3): 403-445.

Wollschläger, Christian. 1990. Civil Litigation and Modernization: Work of the Municipal Courts of Brmen, Germany, in Five Centuries, 1549-1984. Law & Society Review, 24(2):261-82

Zemans, Frances Kahn. 1983. “Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political Process.” American Political Science Review 77(September): 690-703.

Zorn, Christopher J.W. 2002. “U.S. Government Litigation Strategies in the Federal Appellate Courts.” Political Research Quarterly 55(March): 145-166.

Week 4 Role of Law in Politics

Required

Nancy Maveety, ed., Judicial Pioneers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Part 3.

Shipan, Charles R. 1997. Designing Judicial Review: Interest Groups, Congress, and Communications Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Smithey, Shannon. Nd. The Emergence of Judicial Review.

Tate, C. Neal and Toborn Vallinder. 1995. The Global Expansion of Judicial Power – each student is to take responsibility for reporting on one country from this book.

Week 5 Decision-Making: The Attitudinal Model

Required

Baum, Lawrence. 1994. “What Judges Want: Judges’ Goals and Judicial Behavior.” Political Research Quarterly 47(September): 749-768.

Nancy Maveety, ed., Judicial Pioneers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Part 1.

Segal, Jeffrey A. and Albert D. Cover. 1989. "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices." 83 American Political Science Review 557-566.

Review symposium of 1993 edition of Segal & Spaeth, in 4 Law and Courts 3-11 (1994).

The Spaeth-Mendelsohn Exchange: Journal of Politics 26:914; 27:875; and, 28:429.

Mendelson, Wallace. 1964. “The Untroubled World of Jurimetrics.” 26 (4): 914-922.

Kort, Fred. 1964. “Comment on ‘The Untroubled World of Jurimetrics.’” 26 (4): 923-926.

Spaeth, Harold. 1965. “Jurimetrics and Professor Mendelson: A Troubled Relationship.” 27 (4): 875-880.

Mendelson, Wallace. 1966. “An Open Letter to Professor Spaeth and his ‘Jurimetrical’ Colleagues.” 28 (2): 429-432.

Week 6 Decision Making: The Legal model

Required

Gibson, James L. 1978. “Judges’ Role Orientations, Attitudes, and Decisions: An Interactive Model.” American Political Science Review 72(September): 911-924.

Segal, Jeffrey A. and Harold J. Spaeth. 1996. "The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices." 40 American Journal of Political Science 971-1003.

Brisbin, Richard A., Jr. 1996. “Slaying the Dragon: Segal, Spaeth and the Function of Law in Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 40(November): 1004-1017.

Knight, Jack, and Lee Epstein. 1996. “The Norm of Stare Decisis.” American Journal of Political Science 40(November): 1018-1035.

Brenner, Saul, and Marc Stier. 1996. “Retesting Segal and Spaeth’s Stare Decisis Model.” American Journal of Political Science 40(November): 1036-1048.

Bonus: Their response
Norms, Dragons, and Stare Decisis: A Response
Jeffrey A. Segal; Harold J. Spaeth
American Journal of Political Science > Vol. 40, No. 4 (Nov., 1996), pp. 1064-1082
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0092-5853%28199611%2940%3A4%3C1064%3ANDASDA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23

Gillman, Howard. 1998. "The Court as an Idea, Not a Building (or a Game): Interpretive Institutionalism and the Analysis of Supreme Court Decision-Making," Pp. 65-87 in Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman (eds), Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

Gillman, Howard. 2001. “What Has Law Got to Do With It?” 26 Law & Social Inquiry 465-504.

Howard, J. Woodford. 1977. “Role Perceptions and Behavior in Three U.S. Courts of Appeals.” Journal of Politics 39(November): 916-938.

James, Dorothy B. 1968. “Role Theory and the Supreme Court.” Journal of Politics 30(February): 160-186.

Jaros, Dean, and Robert I. Mendelsohn. 1967. “The Judicial Role and Sentencing Behavior.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 11(November): 471-488.

Kahn, Ronald. 1998. "Institutional Norms and Supreme Court Decision-Making: The Rehnquist Court on Privacy and Religion," Pp. 175-198 in Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman (eds), Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Knight, Jack and Lee Epstein. 1996. "The Norm of Stare Decisis." 40 American Journal of Political Science 1018-1035.

Kort, Fred. 1957. “Predicting Supreme Court Decisions Mathematically: A Quantitative Analysis of the ‘Right to Counsel’ Cases.” American Political Science Review 51(March): 1-12.

Kort, Fred. 1963. “Content Analysis of Judicial Opinions and Rules of Law.” In Judicial Decision-Making, ed. Glendon Schubert. New York: Free Press.

Kort, Fred. 1973. “Regression Analysis and Discriminant Analysis: An Application of R.A. Fisher’s Theorem to Data in Political Science.” American Political Science Review 67(June): 555-559.

Kritzer, Herbert M. 1975. “Sources of Role Orientations: ‘Reality or Chance?’” Journal of Politics 37(November): 1048-1055.

Richards, Mark J. and Herbert M. Kritzer. 2001. "Jurisprudential Regimes and Doctrines in Supreme Court Decision Making," unpublished paper.

Scheb, John M., II, Terry Bowen, and Gary Anderson. 1991. “Ideology, Role Orientations, and Behavior in the State Courts of Last Resort.” American Politics Quarterly 19(July): 324-335.

Scheb, John M., II, Thomas D. Ungs, Allison L. Hayes. 1989. “Judicial Role Orientations, Attitudes and Decision Making: A Research Note.” Western Political Quarterly 42(September): 427-435.

Schubert, Glendon. 1963. “Civilian Control and Stare Decisis in the Warren Court.” In Judicial Decision-Making, ed. Glendon Schubert. New York: Free Press.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1986. “Supreme Court Justices as Human Decision Makers: An Individual-Level Analysis of the Search and Seizure Cases.” Journal of Politics 48(November): 938-955.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1984. "Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically: The Search and Seizure Cases, 1962-1981. 78 American Political Science Review 891-900.

Segal, Jeffrey A. and Harold J. Spaeth. 1996. "Norms, Dragons, and Stare Decisis: A Response." 40 American Journal of Political Science 1064-1082.

Shapiro, Martin. 1965. “Stability and Change in Judicial Decision-Making: Incrementalism or Stare Decisis.” Law in Transition Quarterly 2(3): 134-157.

Songer, Donald R. and Stefanie A. Lindquist. 1996. "Not the Whole Story: The Impact of Justices' Values on Supreme Court Decision Making." 40 American Journal of Political Science 1049-1063.

Spaeth, Harold J. and Jeffrey A. Segal. 1999. Majority Rule or Minority Will: Adherence to Precedence on the U.S. Supreme Court. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Spriggs, James F., II, and Thomas G. Hansford. 2001. “Explaining the Overruling of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent.” Journal of Politics 63(November): 1091-1111.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1962. “Supreme Court Behavior in Racial Exclusion Cases: 1935-1960.” American Political Science Review 56(June): 325-330.

Wahlbeck, Paul J. 1998. “The Development of a Legal Rule: The Federal Common Law of Public Nuisance.” Law & Society Review 32(3): 613-637.

Wechsler, Herbert. 1959. “Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law.” Harvard Law Review 73(November): 1-35.

Use of Precedent

Banks, Christopher. 1992. “The Supreme Court and Precedent: An Analysis of Natural Courts and Reversal Trends.” Judicature 75(February/March): 262-268.

Gates, John B., and Glenn A. Phelps. 1996. “Intentionalism in Constitutional Opinions.” Political Research Quarterly 49(June): 245-261.

Newland, Chester A. 1959. “Legal Periodicals and the United States Supreme Court.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 3(February): 58-74.

Richards, Mark J., and Herbert M. Kritzer. 2002. “Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Political Science Review 96(June): 305-320.

Spriggs, James F., II, and Thomas G. Hansford. 2001. “Explaining the Overruling of U.S. Supreme Court Precedent.” Journal of Politics 63(November): 1091-1111.

Walsh, David J. 1997. “On the Meaning and Pattern of Legal Citations: Evidence from State Wrongful Discharge Precedent Cases.” Law & Society Review 31(2): 337-360.

Rule of Law

Kornhauser, Lewis A. 1992. “Modeling Collegial Courts I: Path Dependence.” International Review of Law and Economics 12(June): 169-185.

Kornhauser, Lewis A. 1992. “Modeling Collegial Courts. II. Legal Doctrine.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8(October): 441-470.

Schwartz, Edward P. 1992. “Policy, Precedent, and Power: A Positive Theory of Supreme Court Decision-Making.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8(April): 219-252.

Songer, Donald R., and Stefanie A. Lindquist. 1996. “Not the Whole Story: The Impact of Justices’ Values on Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 40(November): 1049-1063.

Spiller, Pablo T., and Matthew L. Spitzer. 1992. “Judicial Choice of Legal Doctrines.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 8(1): 8-46.

Week 7 Decision Making: the Strategic Models

Required

Epstein and Knight, The Choices Justices Make.

Nancy Maveety, ed., Judicial Pioneers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, Part 2, 193-283.

Maltzman, Forrest, James F. Spriggs II, and Paul J. Wahlbeck. 1998. "Strategy and Judicial Choice: New Institutionalist Approaches to Supreme court Decision-Making." Pp. 43-63 in Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman (eds), Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Maltzman, Forrest, James F. Spriggs, II, and Paul Wahlbeck. 2000. Crafting Law on the Supreme Court: The Collegial Game.

Mashaw, Jerry L. 1997. Greed, Chaos, and Governance: Using Public Choice to Improve Public Law. New Have: Yale University Press.

McGuire, Kevin T. and Barbara Palmer. 1995. “Issue Fluidity on the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Political Science Review 89 (September): 691-702.

Mooney, Christopher Z., and Mei-Hsien Lee. 1995. “Legislative Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-Roe Abortion Regulation Reform.” American Journal of Political Science, 39 (August): 599-627.

Murphy, Walter F. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Perry, Barbara A. and Henry J. Abraham. 1998. "A 'Representative' Supreme Court? The Thomas, Ginsburg, and Breyer Appointments." 81 Judicature 158-167.

Rogers, James R. 2001. “Information and Judicial Review: A Signaling Game of Legislative-Judicial Interaction.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (January): 84-99.

Rogers, James R. and Georg Vanberg. 2002. “Judicial Advisory Opinions and Legislative Outcomes in Comparative Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (April): 379-397.

Schwartz, Edward P. 1992. “Policy, Precedent, and Power: A Positive Theory of Supreme Court Decision Making.” 8 Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 219-252.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1998. “Correction to ‘Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts.’” American Political Science Review 92 (December): 923-926.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1997. “Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts.” American Political Science Review 91 (March): 28-44.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1998. "Supreme Court Deference to Congress: An Examination of the Marksist Model." Pp. 237-253 in Cornell Clayton and Howard Gillman (eds), Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Segal, Jeffrey A., Charles H. Cameron, and Albert D. Cover. 1992. "A Spatial Model of Roll Call Voting: Senators, Constituents, Presidents, and Interest Groups in Supreme Court Confirmations." 36 American Journal of Political Science 96-121.

Segal, Jeffrey A., Richard J. Timpone, and Robert M. Howard. 2000. “Buyer Beware? Presidential Success through Supreme Court Appointments.” 53 Political Research Quarterly 557-595.

Slotnick, Elliot E. 1979. "Who Speaks for the Court? Majority Opinion Assignment from Taft to Burger." 23 American Journal of Political Science 60-77.

Spiller, Pablo T. and Emerson H. Tiller. 1996. “Invitations to Override: Congressional Reversals of Supreme Court Decisions.” International Review of Law and Economics 16 (December): 503-521.

Wahlbeck, Paul J., James F. Spriggs, II, and Forrest Maltzman. 1998. "Marshalling the Court: Bargaining and Accommodation on the U.S. Supreme Court," 42 American Journal of Political Science 294-315.

Wahlbeck, Paul J., James F. Spriggs, II, and Lee Sigelman. 2002. “Ghostwriters on the Court? A Stylistic Analysis of U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Drafts.” American Politics Research 30 (March): 166-192.

Walker, Thomas, Lee Epstein, and William J. Dixon. 1988. "On the Mysterious Demise of Consensual Norms in the United States Supreme Court." 50 Journal of Politics 361-389.

Walter Murphy. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Yates, Jeff and Andrew Whitford. 1998. “Presidential Power and the United States Supreme Court.” Political Research Quarterly 51 (June): 539-550.

The President

Alumbaugh, Steve, and C.K. Rowland. 1990. “The Links between Platform-Based Appointment Criteria and Trial Judges’ Abortion Judgments.” Judicature 74(October/November): 153-162.

Ducat, Craig R., and Robert L. Dudley. 1989. “Federal District Judges and Presidential Power During the Postwar Era.” Journal of Politics 51(February): 98-118.

Gottschall, Jon. 1989. “Reagan’s Appointments to the U.S. Courts of Appeal.” In American Court Systems, 2nd ed., ed. Sheldon Goldman and Austin Sarat. New York: Longman.

McGuire, Kevin T. 1998. “Explaining Executive Success in the U.S. Supreme Court.” Political Research Quarterly 51(June): 505-526.

Yates, Jeff. 2002. Popular Justice: Presidential Prestige and Executive Success in the Supreme Court. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Impact of Presidential Appointments

King, Kimi Lynn, and James Meernik. 1999. “The Supreme Court and the Powers of the Executive: The Adjudication of Foreign Policy.” Political Research Quarterly 52(December): 801-824.

Pritchett, C. Herman. 1949. “The President and the Supreme Court.” Journal of Politics 11(February): 80-92.

Rowland, C.K., and Bridget Jeffery Todd. 1991. “Where You Stand Depends on Who Sits: Platform Promises and Judicial Gatekeeping in the Federal District Courts.” Journal of Politics 53(February): 175-185.

Rowland, C.K., and Robert A. Carp. 1980. “A Longitudinal Study of Party Effects on Federal District Court Policy Propensities.” American Journal of Political Science 24(May): 291-305.

Rowland, C.K., Donald R. Songer, and Robert A. Carp. 1988. “Presidential Effects on Criminal Justice in the Lower Federal Courts: The Reagan Judges.” Law and Society Review 22(1): 191-200.

Rowland, C.K., Robert A. Carp, and Ronald A. Stidham. 1984. “Judges’ Policy Choices and the Value Basis of Judicial Appointments: A Comparison of Support for Criminal Defendants among Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy Appointees to the Federal District Courts.” Journal of Politics 46(August): 886-902.

Segal, Jennifer A. 2000. “Representative Decision Making on the Federal Bench: Clinton’s District Court Appointees.” Political Research Quarterly 53(March): 137-150.

Songer, Donald R., and Martha Humphries Ginn. 2002. “Assessing the Impact of Presidential and Home State Influences on Judicial Decisionmaking in the United States Court of Appeals.” Political Research Quarterly 55(June): 299-328.

Yates, Jeff, and Andrew Whitford. 1998. “Presidential Power and the United States Supreme Court.” Political Research Quarterly 51(June): 539-550.

Solicitor General

Caplan, Lincoln. 1987. The Tenth Justice: The Solicitor General and the Rule of Law. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Meinhold, Stephen S., and Steven A. Shull. 1998. “Policy Congruence Between the President and the Solicitor General.” Political Research Quarterly 51(June): 527-537.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1988. “Amicus Curiae Briefs by the Solicitor General During the Warren and Burger Courts: A Research Note.” Western Political Quarterly 41(March): 135-144.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1990. “Supreme Court Support for the Solicitor General: The Effect of Presidential Appointments.” Western Political Quarterly 43(March): 137-152.

Segal, Jeffrey A., and Cheryl D. Reedy. 1988. “The Supreme Court and Sex Discrimination: The Role of the Solicitor General.” Western Political Quarterly 41(September): 553-568.

Congress

Brady, David W., John Schmidhauser, and Larry L. Berg. 1973. “House Lawyers and Support for the Supreme Court.” Journal of Politics 35(August): 723-729

Casper, Jonathan. 1976. “The Supreme Court and National Policy Making.” American Political Science Review 70(March): 50-63.

Clark, John A., and Kevin T. McGuire. 1996. “Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Flag.” Political Research Quarterly 49(December): 771-781.

Dahl, Robert A. 1957. “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker.” Journal of Public Law 6(Fall): 279-295.

Epstein, Lee, and Thomas G. Walker. 1995. “The Role of the Supreme Court in American Society: Playing the Reconstruction Game.” In Contemplating Courts, ed. Lee Epstein. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.

Epstein, Lee, Thomas G. Walker, and William J. Dixon. 1989. “The Supreme Court and Criminal Justice Disputes: A Neo-Institutional Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 33(November): 825-841.

Funston, Richard. 1975. “The Supreme Court and Critical Elections.” American Political Science Review 69(September): 795-811.

Gates, John B. 1987. “Partisan Realignment, Unconstitutional State Policies, and the U.S. Supreme Court, 1827-1964.” American Journal of Political Science 31(May): 259-280.

Hansford, Thomas G., and David F. Damore. 2000. “Congressional Preferences, Perceptions of Threat, and Supreme Court Decision Making.” American Politics Quarterly 28(October): 490-510.

Hausegger, Lori, and Lawrence Baum. 1999. “Inviting Congressional Action: A Study of Supreme Court Motivations in Statutory Interpretation.” American Journal of Political Science 43(January): 162-185.

Henschen, Beth M., and Edward I. Sidlow. 1989. “The Supreme Court and the Congressional Agenda-Setting Process.” Journal of Law and Politics 5(Summer): 685-724.

Henschen, Beth. 1983. “Statutory Interpretations of the Supreme Court: Congressional Response.” American Politics Quarterly 11(October): 441-458.

Ignagni, Joseph, and James Meernik. 1994. “Explaining Congressional Attempts to Reverse Supreme Court Decisions.” Political Research Quarterly 47(June): 353-371.

Ignagni, Joseph, James Meernik, and Kimi Lynn King. 1998. “Statutory Construction and Congressional Response.” American Politics Quarterly 26(October): 459-484.

Lasser, William. 1985. “The Supreme Court in Periods of Critical Realignment.” Journal of Politics 47(November): 1174-1187.

Martin, Andrew D. 2001. “Congressional Decision Making and the Separation of Powers.” American Political Science Review 95(June): 361-378.

Meernik, James, and Joseph Ignagni. 1995. “Congressional Attacks on Supreme Court Rulings Involving Unconstitutional State Laws.” Political Research Quarterly 48(March): 43-59.

Meernik, James, and Joseph Ignagni. 1997. “Judicial Review and Coordinate Construction of the Constitution.” American Journal of Political Science 41(April): 447-467.

Miller, Mark C. 1992. “Congressional Committees and the Federal Courts: A Neo-Institutional Perspective.” Western Political Quarterly 45(December): 949-970.

Murphy, Walter F. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chapters 5-6.

Richardson, Lilliard E Jr., John M. Scheb, II. 1993. “Divided government and the Supreme Court : Judicial behavior in civil rights and liberties cases, 1954-89.” American Politics Quarterly 21(October): 458-472.

Rogers, James R. 1999. “Legislative Incentives and Two-Tiered Judicial Review: A Game Theoretic Reading of Carolene Products Footnote Four.” American Journal of Political Science 43(October): 1096-1121.

Rogers, James R. 2001. “Information and Judicial Review: A Signaling Game of Legislative-Judicial Interaction.” American Journal of Political Science 45(January): 84-99.

Rogers, James R., and Georg Vanberg. 2002. “Judicial Advisory Opinions and Legislative Outcomes in Comparative Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 46(April): 379-397.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1997. “Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts.” American Political Science Review 91(March): 28-44.

Segal, Jeffrey A. 1998. “Correction to ‘Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts.’” American Political Science Review 92(December): 923-926.

Positive Political Theory

Clinton, Robert Lowry. 1994. “Game Theory, Legal History, and the Origins of Judicial Review: A Revisionist Analysis of Marbury v. Madison.” American Journal of Political Science 38(May): 285-302.

Eskridge, William N., Jr. 1991. “Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions.” Yale Law Journal 101(November): 331-417.

Eskridge, William N., Jr. 1991. “Reneging on History? Playing the Court/Congress/President Civil Rights Game.” California Law Review 79(May): 613-684.

Gely, Rafael, and Pablo T. Spiller. 1990. “A Rational Choice Theory of Supreme Court Statutory Decisions with Applications to the State Farm and Grove City Cases.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6(Fall): 263-300.

Gely, Rafael, and Pablo T. Spiller. 1992. “The Political Economy of Supreme Court Constitutional Decisions: The Case of Roosevelt’s Court-Packing Plan.” International Review of Law and Economics 12(March): 45-67.

Knight, Jack, and Lee Epstein. 1996. “On the Struggle for Judicial Supremacy.” Law and Society Review 30(1): 87-120.

Rodriguez, Daniel B. 1994. “The Positive Political Dimensions of Regulatory Reform” Washington University Law Quarterly 72(Spring): 1-150.

Spiller, Pablo T., and Emerson H. Tiller. 1996. “Invitations to Override: Congressional Reversals of Supreme Court Decisions.” International Review of Law and Economics 16(December): 503-521.

Spiller, Pablo T., and Rafael Gely. 1992. “Congressional Control or Judicial Independence: The Determinants of U.S. Supreme Court Labor-Relations Decisions, 1949-1988.” Rand Journal of Economics 23(Winter): 463-492.

Week 8 Report on Papers

Each Student is to report on the progress of their papers. Oral presentations will be in conference format, which means that the presentation will be about 15 minutes and there will be time for suggestions and questions.

Week 9 Separation of Powers in Comparative Context

Helmke, Gretchen. 2002. “The Logic of Strategic Defection: Court-Executive Relations in Argentina Under Dictatorship and Democracy.” American Political Science Review 96 (June): 291-303.

O'Donnell, Guillermo A. 2000. The Judiciary and the Rule of Law. Journal of Democracy, v. 11, n. 1. , p. 25,

Tate, C. Neal and Stacia L. Haynie. 1993. Authoritarianism and the Functions of Courts: A Time Series Analysis of the Philippine Supreme Court. Law and Society Review 27, #4:707-40.

Vanberg, Georg. 2001. “Legislative-Judicial Relations: A Game-Theoretic Approach to Constitutional Review.” American Journal of Political Science 45(April): 346-361.

Week 10 Judicial Selection

Required

Giles, Michael W., Virginia A. Hettinger, and Todd Peppers. 2001. “Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas.” Political Research Quarterly 54(September): 623-641.

Gimpel, James G., and Robin M. Wolpert. 1996. “Opinion-Holding and Public Attitudes Toward Controversial Supreme Court Nominees.” Political Research Quarterly 49(March): 163-176.

Moraski, Byron J. and Charles R. Shipan. 1999. “The Politics of Supreme Court Nominations: A Theory of Institutional Constraints and Choices.” 43 American Journal of Political Science 1069-95.

State Courts

Aspin, Larry T., and William K. Hall. 1989. “Friends and Neighbors Voting in Judicial Retention Elections: A Research Note Comparing Trial and Appellate Court Elections.” Western Political Quarterly 42(December): 587-596.

Atkins, Burton, Matthew DeZee, and William Eckert. 1984. “State Supreme Court Elections: The Significance of Racial Cues.” American Politics Quarterly 12(April): 211-224.

Baum, Lawrence. 1983. “The Electoral Fate of Incumbent Judges in the Ohio Court of Common Pleas.” Judicature 66(April): 420-430.

Baum, Lawrence. 1987. “Explaining the Vote in Judicial Elections: The 1984 Ohio Supreme Court Elections.” Western Political Quarterly 40(June): 361-371.

Dubois, Philip L. 1979. “Voter Turnout in State Judicial Elections: An Analysis of the Tail on the Electoral Kite.” Journal of Politics 41(August): 865-887.

Dubois, Philip L. 1986. “Penny for Your Thoughts? Campaign Spending in California Trial Court Elections, 1976-1982.” Western Political Quarterly 39(June): 265-284.

Emmert, Craig F., and Henry R. Glick. 1988. “The Selection of State Supreme Court Justices.” American Politics Quarterly 16(October): 445-465.

Glick, Henry R., and Craig F. Emmert. 1987. “Selection Systems and Judicial Characteristics: The Recruitment of State Supreme Court Justices.” Judicature 70(December/January): 228-235.

Griffin, Kenyon N., and Margaret Maier Murdock. 1989. “Practicing Attorneys and Judicial Retention Decisions: Judging the Judges in Wyoming.” Judicature 69(June/July): 36-42.

Griffin, Kenyon N., and Michael J. Horan. 1983. “Patterns of Voting Behavior in Judicial Retention Elections for Supreme Court Justices in Wyoming.” Judicature 67(August): 68-77.

Hall, Melinda Gann. 2001. “State Supreme Courts in American Democracy: Probing the Myths of Judicial Reform.” American Political Science Review 95(June): 315-330.

Hall, William K., and Larry T. Aspin. 1987. “The Friends and Neighbors Effect in Judicial Retention Elections.” Western Political Quarterly 40(December): 703-715.

Hojnacki, Marie, and Lawrence Baum. 1992. “‘New-Style’ Judicial Campaigns and the Voters: Economic Issues and Union Members in Ohio.” Western Political Quarterly 45(December): 921-948.

Hojnacki, Marie, and Lawrence Baum. 1994. “Choosing Judicial Candidates: How Voters Explain their Decisions.” Judicature 75(April/May): 300-309.

Klein, David, and Lawrence Baum. 2001. “Ballot Information and Voting Decisions in Judicial Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 54(December): 709-728.

Lovrich, Nicholas P., Jr., and Charles H. Sheldon. 1985. “Assessing Judicial Elections: Effects upon the Electorate of High and Low Articulation Systems.” Western Political Quarterly 38(June): 276-293.

Lovrich, Nicholas P., Jr., Charles H. Sheldon, and Erik Wasmann. 1988. “The Racial Factor in Nonpartisan Judicial Elections: A Research Note.” Western Political Quarterly 41(December): 807-816.

Lovrich, Nicholas P., Jr., John C. Pierce, and Charles H. Sheldon. 1989. “Citizen Knowledge and Voting in Judicial Elections.” Judicature 73(June/July): 28-33.

Sheldon, Charles H., and Nicholas P. Lovrich, Jr. 1982. “Judicial Accountability vs. Responsibility: Balancing the Views of Voters and Judges.” Judicature 65(May): 470-480.

Sheldon, Charles H., and Nicholas P. Lovrich, Jr. 1983. “Knowledge and Judicial Voting: The Oregon and Washington Experience.” Judicature 67(November): 234-245.

State Courts

Thielemann, Gregory S. 1993. “Local Advantage in Campaign Financing: Friends, Neighbors, and their Money in Texas Supreme Court Elections.” Journal of Politics 55(May): 472-478.

Retirements

Barrow, Deborah J., and Gary Zuk. 1990. “An Institutional Analysis of Turnover in the Lower Federal Courts, 1900-1987.” Journal of Politics 52(May): 457-476.

Hagle, Timothy M. 1993. “Strategic Retirements: A Political Model of Turnover on the United States Supreme Court.” Political Behavior 15(1): 25-48.

Hall, Melinda Gann. 2001. “Voluntary Retirements from State Supreme Courts: Assessing Democratic Pressures to Relinquish the Bench.” Journal of Politics 63(November): 1112-1140.

King, Gary. 1987. “Presidential Appointments to the Supreme Court.” American Politics Quarterly 15(July): 373-386.

Nixon, David C., and J. David Haskin. 2000. “Judicial Retirement Strategies: The Judge’s Role in Influencing Party Control of the Appellate Courts.” American Politics Quarterly 28(October): 458-489.

Spriggs, James F., and Paul J. Wahlbeck. 1995. “Calling It Quits: Strategic Retirement on the Federal Courts of Appeals, 1893-1991.” Political Research Quarterly 48(September): 573-597.

Squire, Peverill. 1988. “Politics and Personal Factors in the Retirement from the United States Supreme Court.” Political Behavior 10(2): 180-190.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1982. “Supreme Court Appointments as a Poisson Distribution.” American Journal of Political Science 26(February): 113-116.

Zuk, Gary, Gerard S. Gryski, and Deborah J. Barrow. 1993. “Partisan Transformation of the Federal Judiciary, 1869-1992.” American Politics Quarterly 21(October): 439-457.

Background Characteristics of Judges

Goldman, Sheldon, and Elliot Slotnick. 1997. “Clinton’s First Term Judiciary: Many Bridges to Cross.” Judicature 80(May/June): 254-273.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1972. “Johnson and Nixon Appointees to the Lower Federal Courts: Some Socio-Political Perspectives.” Journal of Politics 34(August): 934-942.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1978. “A Profile of Carter’s Judicial Nominees.” Judicature 62(November): 246-254.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1981. “Carter’s Judicial Appointments: A Lasting Legacy.” Judicature 64(March): 344-355.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1983. “Reagan’s Judicial Appointments at Mid-Term: Shaping the Bench in His Own Image.” Judicature 66(March): 335-347.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1985. “Reaganizing the Judiciary: The First Term Appointments.” Judicature 68(April/May): 313-329.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1987. “Reagan’s Second Term Judicial Appointments: The Battle at Midway.” Judicature 70(April/May): 324-339.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1989. “Reagan’s Judicial Legacy: Completing the Puzzle and Summing Up.” Judicature 72(April/May): 318-330.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1991. “The Bush Imprint on the Judiciary: Carrying on a Tradition.” Judicature 74(April/May): 294-306.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1993. “Bush’s Judicial Legacy: The Final Imprint.” Judicature 76(April/May): 282-297.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1994. “Clinton’s Nontraditional Judges: Creating a More Representative Bench.” Judicature 78(September/October): 68-73.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1995. “Judicial Selection under Clinton: A Midterm Examination.” Judicature 78(May/June): 276-282.

Gryski, Gerard S., Gary Zuk, and Deborah J. Barrow. 1994. “A Bench That Looks Like America? Representation of African Americans and Latinos on the Federal Courts.” Journal of Politics 56(November): 1076-1086.

Schmidhauser, John R. 1958. “The Justices of the Supreme Court: A Collective Portrait.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 3(February): 1-57.

Schmidhauser, John R. 1979. Judges and Justices. Boston: Little, Brown. Chapter 3.

Backgrounds and Voting Behavior

Abraham, Henry J. 1992. Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court. [3rd Edition] New York: Oxford University Press.

Adamany, David. 1969. “The Party Variable in Judges Voting: Conceptual Notes and a Case Study.” American Political Science Review 62(March): 57-73.

Davis, Sue. 1986. “President Carter’s Selection Reforms and Judicial Policymaking: A Voting Analysis of the United States Courts of Appeals.” American Politics Quarterly 14(October): 328-344.

Goldman, Sheldon. 1969. “Backgrounds, Attitudes and the Voting Behavior of Judges: A Comment on Joel Grossman's Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decisions.” Journal of Politics 31(February): 214-222.

Graham, Barbara Luck. 1990. “Do Judicial Selection Systems Matter? A Study of Black Representation on State Courts.” American Politics Quarterly 18(July): 316-336.

Grossman, Joel B. 1967. “Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decisions: Notes for a Theory.” Journal of Politics 29(May): 334-351.

Gruhl, John, Cassia Spohn, and Susan Welch. 1981. “Women as Policymakers: The Case of Trial Judges.” American Journal of Political Science 25(May): 308-322.

Gryski, Gerard S., and Eleanor C. Main. 1986. “Social Background as Predictors of Votes on State Courts of Last Resort: The Case of Sex Discrimination.” Western Political Quarterly 39(September): 528-537.

Hagle, Timothy M. 1993. “‘Freshmen Effects’ for Supreme Court Justices.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (November): 1142-1157.

Jaros, Dean, and Bradley C. Canon. 1971. “Dissent on State Supreme Courts: The Differential Significance of Characteristics of Judges.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 15(May): 322-346.

Lindquist, Stefanie A., David A. Yalof, and John A. Clark. 2000. “The Impact of Presidential Appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court: Cohesive and Divisive Voting within Presidential Blocs.” 53 Political Research Quarterly 795-814.

Morrison (ed.), Race-ing Justice, En-Gendering Power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas, and the Construction of Social Reality (1992).

Nagel, Stuart. 1961. “Political Party Affiliation and Judges’ Decisions.” American Political Science Review 56(September): 843-850.

Nagel, Stuart. 1962. “Ethnic Affiliations and Judicial Propensities.” Journal of Politics 24(February): 94-110.

Schmidhauser, John R. 1961. “Judicial Behavior and the Sectional Crisis of 1837-1860.” Journal of Politics 23(November): 615-640.

Segal, Jennifer A. 2000. “Representative Decision Making on the Federal Bench: Clinton’s District Court Appointees.” Political Research Quarterly 53(March): 137-150.

Slotnick, Elliot E. 1984. “Judicial Selection Systems and Nomination Outcomes: Does the Process Make a Difference?” American Politics Quarterly 12(April): 225-240.

Songer, Donald R., and Sue Davis. 1990. “The Impact of Party and Region on Voting Decisions in the United States Courts of Appeals, 1955-1986.” Western Political Quarterly 43(June): 317-334.

Songer, Donald R., and Susan J. Tabrizi. 1999. “The Religious Right in Court: The Decision Making of Christian Evangelicals in State Supreme Courts.” Journal of Politics 61(May): 507-526.

Songer, Donald R., Sue Davis, and Susan Haire. 1994. “A Reappraisal of Diversification in the Federal Courts: Gender Effects in the Courts of Appeals.” Journal of Politics 56(May): 425-439.

Tate, C. Neal, and Panu Sittiwong. 1989. “Decision Making in the Canadian Supreme Court: Extending the Personal Attribute Model Across Nations.” Journal of Politics 51(November): 900-916.

Tate, C. Neal, and Roger Handberg. 1991. “Time Binding and Theory Building in Personal Attribute Models of Supreme Court Voting Behavior, 1916-1988.” American Journal of Political Science 35(May): 460-481.

Tate, C. Neal. 1981. “Personal Attribute Models of the Voting Behavior of U.S. Supreme Court Justices.” American Political Science Review 75(June): 355-367.

Uhlman, Thomas M. 1978. “Black Elite Decision Making: The Case of Trial Judges.” American Journal of Political Science 22(November): 884-895.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1973. “Social Background as an Indicator to the Votes of Supreme Court Justices in Criminal Cases: 1947-1956 Terms.” American Journal of Political Science 17(August): 622-630.

Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1986. “Are Social Background Models Time Bound?” American Political Science Review 80(September): 957-967.

Vines, Kenneth N. 1964. “Federal District Judges and Race Relations Cases in the South.” Journal of Politics 26(May): 337-357.

Walker, Thomas G., and Deborah J. Barrow. 1985. “The Diversification of the Federal Bench: Policy and Process Ramifications.” Journal of Politics 47(May): 596-617.

Watson, George L. and John A., Stookey. 1995. Shaping America: The Politics of Supreme Court Appointments. New York: Harper Collins.

Welch, Susan, Michael Combs, and John Gruhl. 1988. “Do Black Judges Make a Difference?” American Journal of Political Science 32(February): 126-136.

Yalof, David. 1999. Pursuit of Justices: Presidential Politics and the Selection of Supreme Court Nominess. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Week 11 Interest Groups

Required

Baird, Vanessa A. Nd. Profit, Political Context and Judicial Power: Why the Supreme Court Cannot Make Liberal Economic Policy. Unpublished manuscript.

Cicowski, Rachel. Womens’ Rights, the Eureopean Court and Supranational Constitutionalism. Law and Society Review, 38: 489-512.

Epstein, Lee, and C.K. Rowland. 1991. “Debunking the Myth of Interest Group Invincibility in the Courts.” American Political Science Review 85(March): 205-217.

Kobylka, Joseph F. 1987. “A Court-Created Context for Group Litigation: Libertarian Groups and Obscenity.” Journal of Politics 49(November): 1061-1078.

Week 12 The Effect of Public Opinion on the Supreme Court and Vice Versa

Required

Caldeira, Gregory A. 1987. “Public Opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court: FDR’s Court-Packing Plan.” American Political Science Review 81(December): 1139-1153.

Franklin, Charles H. and Liane Kosaki C. 1989. "Republican Schoolmaster: The U.S. Supreme Court, Public Opinion, and Abortion." 83 American Political Science Review 751-773.

Hoekstra, Valerie and Jeffrey A. Segal. 1996. “The Shepherding of Local Public Opinion: The Supreme Court and Lamb’s Chapel.” Journal of Politics 58 (November): 1079-1102.

Johnson, Timothy R., and Andrew D. Martin. 1998. “The Public’s Conditional Response to Supreme Court Decisions.” American Political Science Review 92(June): 299-309.

Week 13 Legitimacy

Required

Baird, Vanessa A. 2001. “Building Institutional Legitimacy: The Role of Procedural Justice.” Political Research Quarterly 54(June): 333-354.

Gibson, James L., and Gregory A. Caldeira. 1992. “Blacks and the United States Supreme Court: Models of Diffuse Support.” Journal of Politics 54(November): 1120-1145.

Caldeira, Gregory A., and James L. Gibson. 1995. “The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice in the European Union: Models of Institutional Support.” American Political Science Review 89(June): 356-376.

Mondak, Jeffrey J. and Shannon Ishiyama Smithey. 1997. "The Dynamics of Public Support for the Supreme Court." 59 Journal of Politics 1114-1142.

Huo, Yuen, Heather J. Smith, Tom R. Tyler, and E. Allan Lind. 1996. “Superordinate Identification, Subgroup Identification, and Justice Concerns: Is Separatism the Problem; Is Assimilation the Answer?” Psychological Science 7 (January): 40-45.

Week 14 Judicial Independence in Comparative Perspective

Required

Herron, Erik S. and Kirk A. Randazzo. 2003. “The Relationship Between Independence and Judicial Review in Post-Communist Courts.” Journal of Politics 65 (May): 422-438.

Larkins, Christopher. 1996. “Judicial Independence and Democratization: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis.” American Journal of Comparative Law 44 (4): 605-626.

Burman, Sandra and Wilfried Schärf. 1990. Creating People's Justice: Street Committees and People's Courts in a South African City. Law & Society Review 24(3):693-744.

Knight, Jack and Lee Epstein. 1996. On the Struggle for Judicial Supremacy. 30 Law & Society Review 87-120.

Epstein, Lee, Jack Knight, and Olga Shvetsova. 2002. “The Role of Constitutional Courts in the Establishment and Maintenance of Democratic Systems of Government.” Law & Society Review

Course Objectives

Course Requirements and Grading

Special Needs

Academic Dishonesty

Pre-Semester Recommended Reading

Week 1 Introduction

Required

Research Resources

Recommended

Some older literature

Week 2 Setting The Judicial Agenda

Required

Recommended

Week 3 Litigation

Required

Recommended

Required

Recommended

Week 5 Decision-Making: The Attitudinal Model

Required

Recommended

Other Readings

The Legal Realists

Early Political Science Work

Measuring Ideology

Voting Dimensions

Integrated Models

Change

Freshman Effect

Federal District Courts

State Courts

Other Studies

Week 6 Decision Making: The Legal model

Required

Use of Precedent

Rule of Law

Recommended