scholarly journals ‘All eyes are on you’: Gender, race, and opinion writing on the US Courts of Appeals

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 452-472
Author(s):  
Laura P. Moyer ◽  
John Szmer ◽  
Susan Haire ◽  
Robert K. Christensen
Keyword(s):  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Opinion Writing

Strategic Opinion Language on the US Courts of Appeals

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Joshua Boston
Keyword(s):  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
The Us

Parties push to enforce statutory time limits on SEC enforcement actions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-32
Author(s):  
Benjamin Neaderland ◽  
Jared Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – To alert companies and individuals subject to regulation and investigation by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of potential arguments to enforce time limits on enforcement actions that have heretofore commonly been ignored. Design/methodology/approach – Analyzes two cases - one recently decided and one pending - in US Courts of Appeals, explains significance of issues at stake. Findings – The Courts of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit has recently reviewed, and the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit will soon decide whether statutory timing provisions effectively remove SEC power to bring enforcement actions past their deadlines, at least in some circumstances. Practical implications – Depending on the outcomes of the cases, companies and individuals may gain a new procedural defense or two against SEC enforcement actions. They may also expect the SEC to respond by more actively seeking tolling agreements, and/or being more cautious in issuing Wells notices. Originality/value – Guidance based on pending decisions interpreting US securities law, may bring regulatory adjustments to agency practice and procedure.

Party Capability and the US Courts of Appeals: Understanding Why the “Haves” Win

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Szmer ◽  
Donald R. Songer ◽  
Jennifer Bowie
Keyword(s):  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Party Capability

scholarly journals Of Whites and men: How gender and race impact authorship of published and unpublished opinions in the US courts of appeals

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205316801876286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth A. Tillman ◽  
Rachael K. Hinkle
Keyword(s):  
Demographic Characteristics ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Stare Decisis ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Original Dataset ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Empirical Tests ◽  
Circuit Courts

While authorship assignment has been studied extensively in the US Supreme Court, relatively little is known about such decisions in the intermediate federal courts. Moreover, what we know about circuit courts relates only to published opinions (those which constitute precedent under the doctrine of stare decisis and, thus, influence policy). Little is known about authorship of less influential unpublished opinions. Distinguishing between the costs, benefits, and risks inherent in authoring published versus unpublished opinions, we develop and test theoretical expectations about how demographic characteristics of opinion assignors and assignees influence authorship across opinion type. We conduct empirical tests using an exhaustive original dataset containing all authored dispositive circuit panel opinions issued in 2012. The results reveal that White and male judges are more likely to assign White and male judges to write published opinions and less likely to assign them to write unpublished opinions. The substantive sizes of the discrepancies are somewhat modest, but our results indicate that judges from historically disadvantaged groups have fewer opportunities to shape policy and they shoulder a disproportionately larger share of the routine chore of resolving individual cases.

Panel Effects and Opinion Crafting in the US Courts of Appeals

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael K. Hinkle
Keyword(s):  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Panel Effects

Acclimation Effects and Separate Opinion Writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals*

2003 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 792-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia A. Hettinger ◽  
Stefanie A. Lindquist ◽  
Wendy L. Martinek
Keyword(s):  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Opinion Writing
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document