Does legal doctrine matter? Unpacking law and policy preferences on the US Supreme Court

被引：68

作者：

Bailey, Michael A. ^{[1
,2
]}

Maltzman, Forrest ^{[3
]}

机构：

[1] Georgetown Univ, Dept Govt, Washington, DC 20057 USA

[2] Georgetown Univ, Publ Policy Inst, Washington, DC 20057 USA

[3] George Washington Univ, Washington, DC 20052 USA

来源：

AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW | 2008年 / 102卷 / 03期

基金：

美国国家科学基金会;

关键词：

D O I：

10.1017/S0003055408080283

中图分类号：

D0 [政治学、政治理论];

学科分类号：

0302 ; 030201 ;

摘要：

Judicial scholars often struggle to disentangle the effects of law and policy preferences on US Supreme Court decision making. We employ a new approach to measuring the effect-if any-of the law on justices' decisions. We use positions taken on Supreme Court cases by members of Congress and presidents to identify policy components of voting. Doing so enables us to isolate the effects of three legal doctrines: adherence to precedent, judicial restraint, and a strict interpretation of the First Amendment's protection of speech clause. We find considerable evidence that legal factors play an important role in Supreme Court decision making. We also find that the effect of legal factors varies across justices.

引用

页码：369 / 384

页数：16