carnevalemanfredonia.it
» » The Judges War : The Senate, Legal Culture, Political Ideology and Judicial Confirmation

eBook The Judges War : The Senate, Legal Culture, Political Ideology and Judicial Confirmation download

by Patrick B. McGuigan,Jeffrey P. O'Connell

eBook The Judges War : The Senate, Legal Culture, Political Ideology and Judicial Confirmation download ISBN: 0942522095
Author: Patrick B. McGuigan,Jeffrey P. O'Connell
Publisher: Institute for Government and Politics of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation (1987)
Language: English
Pages: 307
ePub: 1498 kb
Fb2: 1780 kb
Rating: 4.9
Other formats: doc mobi mbr lit
Category: Other

by Patrick B. McGuigan.

by Patrick B. See a Problem? We’d love your help.

Patrick B. McGuigan & Jeffrey P. O’Connell ed. The Judges War: The Senate, Legal Culture, Political Ideology and Judicial Confirmation (1987). Richard L. Pacelle J. The Role of the Supreme Court in American Politics – The Least Dangerous Branch? (2002)

Patrick B. The Role of the Supreme Court in American Politics – The Least Dangerous Branch? (2002). org/old/ENG /frameset ENG. html) – Drafted by judges from around the world, and unanimously approved by the Central Council of the International Association of Judges, the Charter outlines the minimal norms and expectations needed for the maintenance of judicial independence.

JUDGES WAR: THE SENATE, LEGAL CULTURE, POLITICAL IDEOLOGY AND JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION (Patrick .

JUDGES WAR: THE SENATE, LEGAL CULTURE, POLITICAL IDEOLOGY AND JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION (Patrick B. 1987). 2 See GOLDMAN, supra note 1, at 1. 3 Charles E. Schumer, Judging By Ideology, . Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers that the Senate’s confirmation power would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to preventing the appointment of unfit characters. THE FEDERALIST No. 76 (Alexander Hamilton). Select Format: Paperback. ISBN13:9780942522020. Release Date:January 1987.

Scholars, policy makers, and journalists have bemoaned the emphasis on ideology over qualifications and party over performance in the judicial appointment process

Scholars, policy makers, and journalists have bemoaned the emphasis on ideology over qualifications and party over performance in the judicial appointment process. In a unique study, the authors examine archival data to determine the conditions under which Senators obstruct judicial nominations to lower federal courts. More specifically, the authors examine one form of Senate obstruction-the blue slip- and find that Senators use their blue slips to block ideologically distant nominees as well as unqualified nominees.

Recommend this journal.

Though it is often assumed that political clashes over nominees are a new phenomenon, the authors argue that .

Though it is often assumed that political clashes over nominees are a new phenomenon, the authors argue that the appointment of justices and judges has always been a highly contentious process-one largely driven by ideological and partisan concerns. Lee Epstein is the Edward Mallinckrodt Distinguished University Professor of Political Science and Professor of Law at Washington University and a Fellow of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Jeffrey A. Segal is SUNY Distinguished Professor and Chair of Political Science at Stony Brook University.

Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms. Results from Google Books.

They focus on two questions: Do judges appointed by Republican Presidents vote differently from Democratic appointees in ideologically contested cases? And do judges vote differently depending on the ideological leanings of the other judges hearing the same case?

ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? is thoughtful and careful

ARE JUDGES POLITICAL? is thoughtful and careful. It is a terrific empirical introduction to the politics of judicial decisionmaking, an area that is capturing the imagination of many in the legal academy. The analysis of panel effects, which appear to be as large as partisan effects, is especially interesting. Segal, Stony Brook University. The key point raised by the book is the importance of maintaining an ideologically diverse federal judiciary, an increasingly difficult task given recent GOP campaigns to fill the courts with conservative judges. The authors do find that the federal judiciary is becoming more conservative and so the point is more than an academic one.