The Psychology of the Supreme CourtOxford University Press, 2006 M03 16 - 336 páginas With the media spotlight on the recent developments concerning the Supreme Court, more and more people have become increasingly interested in the highest court in the land. Who are the justices that run it and how do they make their decisions? The Psychology of the Supreme Court by Lawrence S. Wrightsman is the first book to thoroughly examine the psychology of Supreme Court decision-making. Dr. Wrightsman's book seeks to help us understand all aspects of the Supreme Court's functioning from a psychological perspective. This timely and comprehensive work addresses many factors of influence including, the background of the justices, how they are nominated and appointed, the role of their law clerks, the power of the Chief Justice, and the day-to-day life in the Court. Dr. Wrightsman uses psychological concepts and research findings from the social sciences to examine the steps of the decision-making process, as well as the ways in which the justices seek to remain collegial in the face of conflict and the degree of predictability in their votes. Psychologists and scholars, as well as those of us seeking to unravel the mystery of The Supreme Court of the United States will find this book to be an eye-opening read. |
Contenido
| 3 | |
2 The Selective Nature of Supreme Court Justices | 29 |
3 Steps in the DecisionMaking Process | 57 |
4 Day to Day in the Life of the Court | 85 |
5 A Psychological Analysis of Decision Formation | 109 |
6 The Rational Choice Model in Judicial DecisionMaking | 133 |
7 The Bush v Gore Decision | 157 |
8 How Individual Justices Affect Decisions | 177 |
More Influential Than Other Justices? | 199 |
10 Can the Courts Decisions Be Predicted? | 229 |
11 Evaluating the Process | 257 |
References | 277 |
Index | 299 |
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Términos y frases comunes
announced appeal appointed asked assignment attitudinal model attorney bench Brandeis briefs Bush Bush’s certiorari chapter Chief Justice Rehnquist circuit court claims Clarence Thomas Clinton colleagues concluded conference confirmation Congress conservative Constitution Court’s decision decided decision-making defendants described discussion dissent Douglas draft Earl Warren election example experts federal judges Felix Frankfurter Florida Supreme Court Fortas Frankfurter goals Gore grant certiorari Harlan ideological individual influence issue judicial Justice Blackmun Justice Brennan Justice Breyer Justice Ginsburg Justice Kennedy Justice O’Connor Justice Scalia Justice Stevens Justice Thomas justice’s law clerks leader liberal lower court majority opinion Marshall minority Miranda Murphy nomination noted O’Brien oral arguments outcome percent petitions political position predicted President president’s questions reflected response Roosevelt ruled Sandra Day O’Connor Senate Souter statistical model Supreme Court justices term tices tion unanimous votes Warren Warren Burger Whittaker William Rehnquist writing wrote
Pasajes populares
Página 101 - A dissent in a court of last resort is an appeal to the brooding spirit of the law, to the intelligence of a future day, when a later decision may possibly correct the error into which the dissenting judge believes the court to have been betrayed.
Página 124 - If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.
Página 54 - EVEN IF HE WERE MEDIOCRE, THERE ARE A LOT OF MEDIOCRE JUDGES AND PEOPLE AND LAWYERS. THEY ARE ENTITLED TO A LITTLE REPRESENTATION, AREN'T THEY, AND A LITTLE CHANCE? WE CAN'T HAVE ALL BRANDEISES AND FRANKFURTERS AND CARDOZOS AND STUFF LIKE THAT THERE.
Página 3 - Judges as persons, or courts as institutions, are entitled to no greater immunity from criticism than other persons or institutions. Just because the holders of judicial office are identified with the interests of justice they may forget their common human frailties and fallibilities. There have sometimes been martinets upon the bench as there have also been...
Página 27 - To require a man to pay the taxes that all other men have to pay cannot possibly be made an instrument to attack his "independence as a judge. I see nothing in the purpose of this clause of the Constitution to indicate that the judges were to be a privileged class, free from bearing their share of the cost of the institutions upon which their well-being if not their life depends.
Página 25 - Judges and lawyers, like other humans, are moved by natural sympathy in a case like this to find a way for Joshua and his mother to receive adequate compensation for the grievous harm inflicted upon them. But before yielding to that impulse, it is well to remember once again that the harm was inflicted not by the State of Wisconsin, but by Joshua's father.
Página 211 - O'CONNOR, JUSTICE KENNEDY, and JUSTICE SOUTER announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II...
Página 70 - ORAL ARGUMENT. 1. Oral argument should undertake to emphasize and clarify the written argument appearing in the briefs theretofore filed. The court looks with disfavor on any oral argument that is read from a prepared text.
Página 123 - The issue of a wife cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent, is indisputably presumed to be legitimate; 6.
Referencias a este libro
Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making Paul M. Collins, Jr. Vista previa limitada - 2008 |
Oral Arguments Before the Supreme Court: An Empirical Approach Lawrence Wrightsman Vista previa limitada - 2008 |