Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- American Politics (2)
- Law and Politics (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Legal Studies (2)
- Political Science (2)
-
- American Popular Culture (1)
- American Studies (1)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Communication (1)
- Courts (1)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (1)
- Journalism Studies (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legal Theory (1)
- Political Theory (1)
- Psychology (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Social Psychology (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Institution
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Why The Supreme Court Cares About Elites, Not The American People, Lawrence Baum, Neal Devins
Faculty Publications
Supreme Court Justices care more about the views of academics, journalists, and other elites than they do about public opinion. This is true of nearly all Justices and is especially true of swing Justices, who often cast the critical votes in the Court’s most visible decisions. In this Article, we will explain why we think this is so and, in so doing, challenge both the dominant political science models of judicial behavior and the significant work of Barry Friedman, Jeffrey Rosen, and others who link Supreme Court decision making to public opinion.
Will The Real Elena Kagan Please Stand Up? Conflicting Public Images In The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Keith J. Bybee
Will The Real Elena Kagan Please Stand Up? Conflicting Public Images In The Supreme Court Confirmation Process, Keith J. Bybee
Institute for the Study of the Judiciary, Politics, and the Media at Syracuse University
What images of judging did the Kagan confirmation process project?
My response to this question begins with a brief overview of existing public perceptions of the Supreme Court. I argue that a large portion of the public sees the justices as impartial arbiters who can be trusted to rule fairly. At the same time, a large portion of the public also sees the justices as political actors who are wrapped up in partisan disputes. Given these prevailing public views, we should expect the Kagan confirmation process to transmit contradictory images of judicial decisionmaking, with a portrait of judging as a …
All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee
All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies And The Rule Of Law, Keith J. Bybee
College of Law - Faculty Scholarship
This paper contains the introduction to the new book, All Judges Are Political—Except When They Are Not: Acceptable Hypocrisies and the Rule of Law (Stanford University Press, 2010).
The book begins with the observation that Americans are divided in their beliefs about whether courts operate on the basis of unbiased legal principle or of political interest. This division in public opinion in turn breeds suspicion that judges do not actually mean what they say, that judicial professions of impartiality are just fig leaves used to hide the pursuit of partisan purposes.
Comparing law to the practice of common courtesy, the …