U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making in the Area of Religion, 1987-2011
نویسنده
چکیده
There are many views on how human decision makers behave. In this work, the Justices of the United States Supreme Court will be viewed in terms of constrained maximization and cognitivecybernetic theory. This paper will integrate research in such fields as law, political science, psychology, economics and decision making theory. It will be argued that due to its heavy workload, the Supreme Court is forced to make decisions in a boundedly rational manner. The ideas and theory put forward here will be tested in the area of the Court’s decisions involving religion. Therefore, the cases involving the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause and Establishment Clause will be analyzed. Also, variables such as the U.S. government’s involvement in these cases will be considered. The years to be studied will be 1987-2011. Keywords—Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court.
منابع مشابه
Consensus and Unanimity at the Supreme Court of Canada
Empirical studies of judicial decision-making tend to focus on explaining why individual judges often come to different conclusions. The dominant understanding of decision-making on the U.S. Supreme Court is the ideologically based policy preferences of the justices, with related studies showing that American justices often make strategic choices to ensure the Court’s decisions reflect their pr...
متن کاملIdeological Consistency and Attitudinal Conflict: A Comparative Analysis of the U.S. and Canadian Supreme Courts
According to attitudinal theorists, justices on the U. S. Supreme Court decide cases largely on political preferences that fall within one dimension of ideology. The focus of this study is to test whether a unidimensional ideological model explains the voting behavior of Canadian Supreme Court justices (1992-1997). The factor analysis results in three areas of law, two of which have never been ...
متن کاملJustice Blocks and Predictability of U.S. Supreme Court Votes
Successful attempts to predict judges' votes shed light into how legal decisions are made and, ultimately, into the behavior and evolution of the judiciary. Here, we investigate to what extent it is possible to make predictions of a justice's vote based on the other justices' votes in the same case. For our predictions, we use models and methods that have been developed to uncover hidden associ...
متن کاملAn historical review of the legal and personal background to Jackson v. Indiana.
The landmark case of Jackson v. Indiana is well known to forensic psychiatrists, but little is known of the personal and legal background of this case. Mr. Jackson's state hospital records were reviewed, as were available transcripts and decisions of the Indiana court proceedings, before and after the U.S. Supreme Court decision, and local newspaper coverage, to understand how this case developed.
متن کاملSelecting Influence? the Solicitor General
Scholars have devoted a great deal of research to investigating the role and influence of the U.S. Solicitor General (SG) as amicus curiae in the Supreme Court. Yet, we know little about the SG’s decision to file an amicus brief and how this relates to the SG’s success on the merits. We fill this void by examining legal, political, and administrative factors that affect the SG’s decision to par...
متن کامل