The Constraint of Law: A Study of Supreme Court Dissensus
To study the behavior of judges, one must first consider whether judges are just like any other political actor (e.g., legislators) or whether, because of their affiliation with the judiciary, law constrains their behavior to some extent. Research aimed at considering the extent to which judges are...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American politics research 2007-09, Vol.35 (5), p.755-768 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 768 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 755 |
| container_title | American politics research |
| container_volume | 35 |
| creator | Benesh, Sara C. Spaeth, Harold J. |
| description | To study the behavior of judges, one must first consider whether judges are just like any other political actor (e.g., legislators) or whether, because of their affiliation with the judiciary, law constrains their behavior to some extent. Research aimed at considering the extent to which judges are constrained by the law is sparse, and conclusions resulting from such research are mixed. In this article, the authors explore the extent to which law constrains judges by focusing on the decision to dissent rather than concur when Supreme Court justices write separately. The authors find that, although law matters, it does not constrain. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1532673X06296991 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36854791</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1532673X06296991</sage_id><sourcerecordid>36854791</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-db3168d4f1f9f1c95479ad254a5a7e7f719fd2d20c8d3724d8ae47334a3eab7a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKtHwWNB8LaaySQ7m6MUv6DgpYK3MN0k2tLu1mSL-O_dpR5E8DQD87wPwyvEBchrAKIbMKhKwldZKltaCwdiBMaoApHwcNhRFcP9WJzkvJISlK5oJM7n72EybZvcJV423aSNkxl_noqjyOsczn7mWLzc382nj8Xs-eFpejsramWxK_wCoay8jhBthNoaTZa9MpoNU6BIYKNXXsm68khK-4qDJkTNGHhBjGNxtfduU_uxC7lzm2Wuw3rNTWh32WFZDU7owcs_4Krdpab_zYFVFRlDxvaU3FN1anNOIbptWm44fTmQbmjJ_W2pjxT7SOa38Ev6H_8NtdJkVw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928755759</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Constraint of Law: A Study of Supreme Court Dissensus</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Benesh, Sara C. ; Spaeth, Harold J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Benesh, Sara C. ; Spaeth, Harold J.</creatorcontrib><description>To study the behavior of judges, one must first consider whether judges are just like any other political actor (e.g., legislators) or whether, because of their affiliation with the judiciary, law constrains their behavior to some extent. Research aimed at considering the extent to which judges are constrained by the law is sparse, and conclusions resulting from such research are mixed. In this article, the authors explore the extent to which law constrains judges by focusing on the decision to dissent rather than concur when Supreme Court justices write separately. The authors find that, although law matters, it does not constrain.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1532-673X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1532673X06296991</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Case studies ; Dissent ; Ideology ; Judges & magistrates ; Judiciary ; Law ; Legal norms ; Legal systems ; Legislators ; Litigation ; Political science research ; Sociology of law ; Supreme Court ; Supreme Court decisions ; Supreme courts ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>American politics research, 2007-09, Vol.35 (5), p.755-768</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Sep 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-db3168d4f1f9f1c95479ad254a5a7e7f719fd2d20c8d3724d8ae47334a3eab7a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1532673X06296991$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1532673X06296991$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21818,27923,27924,43620,43621</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Benesh, Sara C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spaeth, Harold J.</creatorcontrib><title>The Constraint of Law: A Study of Supreme Court Dissensus</title><title>American politics research</title><description>To study the behavior of judges, one must first consider whether judges are just like any other political actor (e.g., legislators) or whether, because of their affiliation with the judiciary, law constrains their behavior to some extent. Research aimed at considering the extent to which judges are constrained by the law is sparse, and conclusions resulting from such research are mixed. In this article, the authors explore the extent to which law constrains judges by focusing on the decision to dissent rather than concur when Supreme Court justices write separately. The authors find that, although law matters, it does not constrain.</description><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Dissent</subject><subject>Ideology</subject><subject>Judges & magistrates</subject><subject>Judiciary</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Legal norms</subject><subject>Legal systems</subject><subject>Legislators</subject><subject>Litigation</subject><subject>Political science research</subject><subject>Sociology of law</subject><subject>Supreme Court</subject><subject>Supreme Court decisions</subject><subject>Supreme courts</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>1532-673X</issn><issn>1552-3373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKtHwWNB8LaaySQ7m6MUv6DgpYK3MN0k2tLu1mSL-O_dpR5E8DQD87wPwyvEBchrAKIbMKhKwldZKltaCwdiBMaoApHwcNhRFcP9WJzkvJISlK5oJM7n72EybZvcJV423aSNkxl_noqjyOsczn7mWLzc382nj8Xs-eFpejsramWxK_wCoay8jhBthNoaTZa9MpoNU6BIYKNXXsm68khK-4qDJkTNGHhBjGNxtfduU_uxC7lzm2Wuw3rNTWh32WFZDU7owcs_4Krdpab_zYFVFRlDxvaU3FN1anNOIbptWm44fTmQbmjJ_W2pjxT7SOa38Ev6H_8NtdJkVw</recordid><startdate>200709</startdate><enddate>200709</enddate><creator>Benesh, Sara C.</creator><creator>Spaeth, Harold J.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200709</creationdate><title>The Constraint of Law</title><author>Benesh, Sara C. ; Spaeth, Harold J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c293t-db3168d4f1f9f1c95479ad254a5a7e7f719fd2d20c8d3724d8ae47334a3eab7a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Dissent</topic><topic>Ideology</topic><topic>Judges & magistrates</topic><topic>Judiciary</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Legal norms</topic><topic>Legal systems</topic><topic>Legislators</topic><topic>Litigation</topic><topic>Political science research</topic><topic>Sociology of law</topic><topic>Supreme Court</topic><topic>Supreme Court decisions</topic><topic>Supreme courts</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Benesh, Sara C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spaeth, Harold J.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>American politics research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Benesh, Sara C.</au><au>Spaeth, Harold J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Constraint of Law: A Study of Supreme Court Dissensus</atitle><jtitle>American politics research</jtitle><date>2007-09</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>755</spage><epage>768</epage><pages>755-768</pages><issn>1532-673X</issn><eissn>1552-3373</eissn><abstract>To study the behavior of judges, one must first consider whether judges are just like any other political actor (e.g., legislators) or whether, because of their affiliation with the judiciary, law constrains their behavior to some extent. Research aimed at considering the extent to which judges are constrained by the law is sparse, and conclusions resulting from such research are mixed. In this article, the authors explore the extent to which law constrains judges by focusing on the decision to dissent rather than concur when Supreme Court justices write separately. The authors find that, although law matters, it does not constrain.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1532673X06296991</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1532-673X |
| ispartof | American politics research, 2007-09, Vol.35 (5), p.755-768 |
| issn | 1532-673X 1552-3373 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_36854791 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; SAGE Complete A-Z List; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Case studies Dissent Ideology Judges & magistrates Judiciary Law Legal norms Legal systems Legislators Litigation Political science research Sociology of law Supreme Court Supreme Court decisions Supreme courts U.S.A |
| title | The Constraint of Law: A Study of Supreme Court Dissensus |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T03%3A32%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Constraint%20of%20Law:%20A%20Study%20of%20Supreme%20Court%20Dissensus&rft.jtitle=American%20politics%20research&rft.au=Benesh,%20Sara%20C.&rft.date=2007-09&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=755&rft.epage=768&rft.pages=755-768&rft.issn=1532-673X&rft.eissn=1552-3373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1532673X06296991&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E36854791%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928755759&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1532673X06296991&rfr_iscdi=true |