Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Sources And Consequences Of Political Rhetoric: Issue Importance, Collegial Bargaining, And Disagreeable Rhetoric In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael A. Zilis, Justin Wedeking
The Sources And Consequences Of Political Rhetoric: Issue Importance, Collegial Bargaining, And Disagreeable Rhetoric In Supreme Court Opinions, Michael A. Zilis, Justin Wedeking
Political Science Faculty Publications
How do political actors use rhetoric after an initial policy battle? We explore factors that lead Supreme Court justices to integrate disagreeable rhetoric into opinions. Although disagreeable language has negative consequences, we posit that justices pay this cost for issues with high personal significance. At the same time, we argue that integrating disagreeable rhetoric has a deleterious effect on the institution by reducing majority coalition size. Examining opinions from 1946 to 2011 using text-based measures of disagreeable rhetoric, we model the language of opinion writing as well as explore the consequences for coalition size. Our findings suggest serious implications for …
Blurring Institutional Boundaries: Judges' Perceptions Of Threats To Judicial Independence, Alyx Mark, Michael A. Zilis
Blurring Institutional Boundaries: Judges' Perceptions Of Threats To Judicial Independence, Alyx Mark, Michael A. Zilis
Political Science Faculty Publications
The legislature wields multiple tools to limit judicial power, but scholars have little information about how judges interpret variant threats and which they find most concerning. To provide insight, we conduct original interviews regarding legislative threats to courts with over two dozen sitting federal judges, representing all tiers of the federal judiciary. We find that judges have a nuanced understanding of threats and tend to identify components of legislative proposals that threaten formal institutional powers as more concerning than those challenging policy set by judges. This distinction has broad implications for our understanding of judicial behavior at the federal level.
Leaving The Devil You Know: Crime Victimization, Us Deterrence Policy, And The Emigration Decision In Central America, Jonathan T. Hiskey, Abby Córdova, Mary Fran Malone, Diana M. Orcés
Leaving The Devil You Know: Crime Victimization, Us Deterrence Policy, And The Emigration Decision In Central America, Jonathan T. Hiskey, Abby Córdova, Mary Fran Malone, Diana M. Orcés
Political Science Faculty Publications
Following a sharp increase in the number of border arrivals from the violence-torn countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras in the spring and summer of 2014, the United States quickly implemented a strategy designed to prevent such surges by enhancing its detention and deportation efforts. In this article, we examine the emigration decision for citizens living in the high-crime contexts of northern Central America. First, through analysis of survey data across Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, we explore the role crime victimization plays in leading residents of these countries to consider emigration. Next, using survey data collected across twelve …
Hitting The "Bullseye" In Supreme Court Coverage: News Quality In The Court's 2014 Term, Michael A. Zilis, Justin Wedeking, Alexander Denison
Hitting The "Bullseye" In Supreme Court Coverage: News Quality In The Court's 2014 Term, Michael A. Zilis, Justin Wedeking, Alexander Denison
Political Science Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.