The Canadian Supreme Court: Attitudinal Conflict in Right to Counsel Cases

Explores whether Supreme Court justices in Canada are influenced by their political ideology when resolving right to counsel cases. Using an empirical model that controls the effects of case facts, they find considerable evidence that the attitudes of the justices do provide a significant explanatio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Political science quarterly 2006-12, Vol.121 (4), p.677-697
Hauptverfasser:	OSTBERG, C.L., WETSTEIN, MATTHEW E.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Analysis Attitudes Attorneys Behavioral decision theory Canada Canada - Jurisprudence Canada - Supreme court - Decisions Charter of Rights-Canada Charters Civil rights Conflict Courts Criminal justice Decision analysis Decision making Defendants Freedoms Government regulation Ideology Influence Judges Judges - Political attitudes Judicial process Judicial reviews Judiciary Law Laws, regulations and rules Lawyers Legal counsel Liberalism Modeling Police Political Ideologies Political questions and judicial power Prime ministers Public law Right to counsel Supreme Court Supreme Court justices Supreme Courts Voting Voting Behavior Warnings
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:	Explores whether Supreme Court justices in Canada are influenced by their political ideology when resolving right to counsel cases. Using an empirical model that controls the effects of case facts, they find considerable evidence that the attitudes of the justices do provide a significant explanation for their voting behavior in non-unanimous cases. Tables, Appendixes. Adapted from the source document.
ISSN:	0032-3195 1538-165X
DOI:	10.1002/j.1538-165X.2006.tb00586.x