The Influence of Home-State Reputation and Public Opinion on Federal Circuit Court Judges

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Owens ◽  
Patrick C. Wohlfarth
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Home State ◽  
Federal Circuit

Public Mood, Previous Electoral Experience, and Responsiveness Among Federal Circuit Court Judges

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1003-1031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Owens ◽  
Patrick C. Wohlfarth
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Political Experience ◽  
Democratic Control ◽  
Federal Circuit ◽  
Federal Judges

Whether public opinion influences federal judges is a question that has long motivated—but often eluded—scholars. In this article, we examine two related questions: First, whether federal circuit court judges respond to circuit-level public opinion and, second, whether judges with extensive past elected political experience are even more responsive. The data show that circuit judges indeed respond to public opinion. The results also suggest that judges with greater past elected political experience may be more responsive. The results have implications for democratic control of the unelected judiciary, and suggest that appointing judges with electoral experience could, for better or worse, lead to a more majoritarian judiciary.

The Intergroup Foundations of Policy Influence

2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 729-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael K. Hinkle ◽  
Michael J. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Search And Seizure ◽  
Preference Aggregation ◽  
Policy Influence ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
Professional Characteristics ◽  
Original Dataset ◽  
Federal Circuit ◽  
Group Memberships ◽  
Circuit Courts ◽  
Ingroup Favoritism

Most decisions about policy adoption require preference aggregation, which makes it difficult to determine how and when an individual can influence policy change. Examining how frequently a judge is cited offers insight into this question. Drawing upon the psychological concept of social identity, we suggest that shared group memberships can account for differences in policy influence. We investigate this possibility using the demographic and professional group memberships of federal circuit court judges and an original dataset of citations among all published search and seizure cases from federal circuit courts from 1990 to 2010. The results indicate that shared professional characteristics do tend to lead to ingroup favoritism in citation decisions while only partial evidence of such a pattern emerges for demographic group memberships. There is evidence of ingroup favoritism among female and minority judges but none for male or white judges. Overall, judges appear to generally have greater influence on judges with shared characteristics. The findings have vital implications for our understanding of the diversification of policy-making institutions.

scholarly journals “When I Can Read My Title Clear”: Harriet Beecher Stowe and the Stowe v. Thomas Copyright Infringement Case

Prospects ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 201-245
Author(s):  
Melissa J. Homestead
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Harriet Beecher Stowe ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
German Translation ◽  
Uncle Tom's Cabin ◽  
Fugitive Slave Law ◽  
Fugitive Slave ◽  
Federal Circuit

In 1853, Harriet Beecher Stowe filed a copyright suit against F. W. Thomas, a Philadelphia printer who had published an unauthorized German translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin in his newspaper, Die Freie Presse. Stowe brought suit in the federal circuit court in Philadelphia, thus ironically placing her claim in the hands of Justice Robert Grier, a notable enforcer of slaver-owners' interests under the Fugitive Slave Law. Grier found that Stowe's property rights in her novelistic plea for resistance to the Fugitive Slave Law were very narrow and that she could not prevent Thomas from publishing a translation without her authorization. In the conclusion to the court's opinion, Grier wrote,

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document