Campaign Fundraising in State Supreme Court Elections*

Objective. What factors affect the ability of candidates for state supreme courts to raise money? In this article, I test (and expand) existing theories of political fundraising (taken largely from legislative studies) in the context of judicial elections. Methods. I examine the determinants of campaign contributions to all candidates running for the state supreme court from 1990–2000 in states that have competitive judicial elections. Most basically, I hypothesize that a candidate's ability to raise money is dependent on characteristics of the candidate, the state electoral and supreme court context, and institutional arrangements. Results. The results suggest that candidates who have a greater probability of success than their opponents are better able to raise money. Yet, all is not within the control of the candidates, as the electoral context of the state and the court as well as the institutional arrangements of the election and the court are also relevant. Conclusions. Campaign fundraising by state supreme court candidates, much like fundraising by legislative candidates, can be understood in systematic and predictable ways. Candidates have some control over the amount of money that they are able to raise (and thus their electoral viability), although there is little they can do about the electoral and supreme court context. Additionally, institutional arrangements play a large role in raising campaign funds, suggesting that there is not much reformers can do to limit the amount of money involved in elections short of eradicating elections altogether.     

Does Seniority Matter? The Conditional Influence of State Methods of Judicial Retention*

Objective. Capitalizing on attention directed to judicial agreement and the associated consequences of judicial elections, this article conducts an examination of the effects of seniority and state methods of judicial retention on decisions by state supreme court justices to dissent. Methods. Using data drawn from the State Supreme Court Data Archive, this research analyzes decisions by individual justices to dissent in 33,582 tort cases from 1995 to 1998. GEE logistic analysis with cases as the clustering unit is the estimation procedure. Results. While the seniority of justices is positively connected to dissent, the findings illustrate that seniority's effect is nuanced and conditioned by a state's method of judicial retention. The impact of a justice's seniority relative to his or her colleagues is most powerful in appointive courts where justices serve without fear of electoral retaliation. Alternatively, within elective courts, justices respond to elections by pursuing a consensual approach regardless of their seniority. Conclusion. The dissent characteristics of justices in state supreme courts are intricately tied to the length of careers and the methods by which states keep justices in office.     

Litigant participation and success in water rights cases in the Western States

Over the years, many decisions concerning the rights to water resources have been addressed in state legislatures and federal courts; however, the majority of decisions concerning the conflicting demands over water have been addressed in state courts. This study examines the body of water rights cases heard in state supreme courts of the eleven Western states and focus on litigant participation and success. The data set includes all the water rights cases decided between 1972 and 2008 in the eleven western state high courts (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming). The study explores the propensity of different types of litigants to initiate water rights cases at the state supreme court level, and also examines litigation patterns to determine which litigants are the targets of these appeals. Galanter's (1974) party capability theory is used to help explain patterns of litigant success.     

Acclimation Effects on the Supreme Court of Canada: A Cross‐Cultural Examination of Judicial Folklore*

Objective. Few public law theories developed to understand the decision making of U.S. courts have been examined in different cultural settings. This study examines the applicability of the “freshman effects” theory in the context of the Canadian Supreme Court. Methods. The article uses analysis of variance tests to examine changes in the voting and authorship patterns of 15 Canadian Supreme Court Justices during the Laskin, Dickson, and Lamer Court periods (1973–1999). Results. We find very little evidence of acclimation effects on the Canadian Supreme Court. However, through the Chief Justice's power to compose decision panels, Canadian justices in their first full year of service are assigned significantly fewer cases than in subsequent years of their career. Thus, Canadian justices are given time to acclimate to the high court through a lower workload, a luxury not afforded to U.S. justices. Conclusions. Theories of public law adopted to understand U.S. courts may be limited in their generalizability beyond the U.S. setting because of the institutional and political forces that shape judicial decision making in other courts.     

Agenda Setting and State Policy Diffusion: The Effects of Media Attention,State Court Decisions,and Policy Learning on Fetal Killing Policy*

Objectives. This study combines theories on agenda setting, policy innovation, and policy learning to develop an improved model of state policy change. The case of fetal killing policy change in the states is used to develop a model that incorporates national media attention and the decisions of state courts, in addition to policy learning variables that account for the policy changes of neighboring states and the passage of time. Methods. I test the effect of national media attention, decisions by the courts, and the actions of neighboring states on the likelihood that states will change their fetal homicide policies. Using time‐series cross‐sectional data from 1970 to 2002, the model is tested using logistic regression analysis. In addition to testing the theories mentioned above, control variables in the model include citizen and government ideology and the percentage of state residents who are fundamentalist Protestants. Results. Three of the four research hypotheses are supported by the statistical analysis. The results demonstrate that increased media attention to fetal homicide in a given year increases the likelihood that a state will change its policy the next year. Support is also found for the hypothesis that state court decisions will affect policy change. One of the control variables, government liberalism, is also found to decrease the likelihood that states will change their fetal homicide policies. Conclusions. This study lends insight into why states change their policies by including agenda‐setting variables such as media attention and decisions made by the courts. States do react to the actions of the courts by making changes to policies affected by the decisions.     

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

Objective. This article investigates the existence of a freshman effect on separate opinion authorship on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. First, we evaluate the extent to which freshman judges demonstrate unique behavior with respect to writing concurring and dissenting opinions. Second, we examine the potential for background factors to condition any freshman effect. Methods. Individual judges' decisions to author separate opinions, drawn from the Courts of Appeals Database (1960 to 1988), are modeled as a function of a host of individual‐ and circuit‐level factors, including the freshman status of the judge. Results. After controlling for alternative explanations, we find that freshman judges on the courts of appeals are less likely to author concurring and dissenting opinions. Prior federal or appellate court experience, however, does not appear to condition the freshman effect. Conclusion. Freshman circuit court judges experience significant acclimation effects following their elevation to the federal appellate bench.     

Women's Representation on State Trial and Appellate Courts*

Objective. This article examines the factors affecting women's representation at each level of the state judiciary. Methods. Using extended beta‐binomial and Poisson models, this article determines the effects of judicial selection, state ideology, and the pool of women eligible to serve on state trial and appellate courts. Results. I find that the pool of women eligible to serve, state ideology, and some methods of judicial selection affect the number of women serving on state courts. Conclusions. By modeling the process on the two courts differently, I find that the factors affecting trial courts are not necessarily the same as those affecting women's representation on appellate courts. Because of the differences in the two levels of the judiciary, future analysis should consider how these two levels influence individual decisions to seek a seat on state courts.     

Existing Diversity and Judicial Selection: The Role of the Appointment Method in Establishing Gender Diversity in State Supreme Courts

Objectives . To explore differences in the appointment and election method of selecting state high court justices in promoting gender diversity, and to explore the effect of existing gender diversity within the political institutions on the selection of women to office. Methods . Our data include all justices who have been selected to state courts of last resort from 1980 through 1997. We use logistic regression analysis to test the effect of existing gender diversity on a high court on the likelihood that a woman will be selected to fill a vacancy. Results . Women are significantly more likely to be selected to a state high court when initially appointed, and this effect is particularly pronounced when the governor is Democratic. When an appointment system is used, women are much more likely to be appointed to an all-male court than to a gender-diverse court. Conclusions . Appointment systems are more likely to create gender diversity on state courts; however, this effect operates primarily to diversify all-male courts. This difference between appointment and election systems may reflect differences in knowledge between elite actors and the mass public about the composition of the institution.     

Are Immigrants a Drain on the Public Fisc? State and Local Impacts in New Jersey

Objectives . To explore differences in the appointment and election method of selecting state high court justices in promoting gender diversity, and to explore the effect of existing gender diversity within the political institutions on the selection of women to office. Methods . Our data include all justices who have been selected to state courts of last resort from 1980 through 1997. We use logistic regression analysis to test the effect of existing gender diversity on a high court on the likelihood that a woman will be selected to fill a vacancy. Results . Women are significantly more likely to be selected to a state high court when initially appointed, and this effect is particularly pronounced when the governor is Democratic. When an appointment system is used, women are much more likely to be appointed to an all-male court than to a gender-diverse court. Conclusions . Appointment systems are more likely to create gender diversity on state courts; however, this effect operates primarily to diversify all-male courts. This difference between appointment and election systems may reflect differences in knowledge between elite actors and the mass public about the composition of the institution.     

基于压制行为而救济的美国股东权益保护制度

美国不少州的强制解散公司制定法将压制及其类似行为作为司法解散公司的根据和理由,赋予权益受侵害股东广泛的救济基础;法院在压制行为的司法认定和适用上给予宽泛的解释,并以小股东权益为中心或引入股东合理期待原则来界定压制行为,拓宽了股东寻求司法救济的空间;制定法还授权法院、法院也经常自主地适用各种替代救济,以充分保护股东权益。基于压制行为而救济股东权益的美国公司法理念和灵活适用公司解散及其替代救济措施的制定法做法与司法实践值得我们借鉴。     

Out with the Old,In with the Old: A Closer Look at Younger Versus Older Elderly Migration*

Objective. This research examines the migration behavior of the elderly, recognizing that the older and younger elderly may make different decisions and have different consequences for the states in which they live. Methods. Using U.S. Census migration flow data, we describe the movements of the younger and older elderly. Our econometric analysis brings together the wisdom of elderly migration research that focuses on motives (amenity vs. return/assistance) and the Tiebout‐related research that considers the effects of policy. Results. We find that all elderly age groups avoid moving to states with high estate/inheritance/gift taxes, although the effect weakens with age. Likewise, the younger elderly appear to be “shopping around” for destinations with a temperate climate and favorable government policies regarding income taxes and welfare spending, whereas the older elderly are more likely to be “driven out” of their origin state by a high cost of living and income and property taxes. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that both the patterns of migration and the factors that affect migration decisions differ between the younger and older elderly.     

Are Public Expenditures Associated with Better Child Outcomes in the U.S.? A Comparison across 50 States

Our article utilizes variation across the 50 U.S. states to examine the relationship between public expenditures on children and child outcomes. We find that public expenditures on children are related to better child outcomes across a wide range of indicators including measures of child mortality, elementary school test scores, and adolescent behavioral outcomes. States that spend more on children have better child outcomes even after taking into account a number of potential confounding influences. Our results are robust to numerous variations in model specifications and to the inclusion of proxies for unobserved characteristics of states. Our sensitivity analyses suggest that the results we present may be conservative, yet our findings reveal a strong relationship between state generosity toward children and children's well-being.     

Separation of powers and the Ecuadorian Supreme Court: exploring presidential–judicial conflict in a post-transition democracy

In 2005 ongoing political conflict between the executive and legislative branches of government in Ecuador culminated in a struggle over the judiciary. These events resulted in the dismissal, re-constitution, and dismissal again of the Ecuadorian high court (the Corte Suprema de Justicia) and the impeachment of the president. This paper uses the political crisis surrounding the dismissal of the Ecuadorian Supreme Court of Justice to examine the broader phenomenon of executive branch attacks on the judiciary in South American and Africa. We make three general observations: (1) the longevity of the judiciary alone (time without attack) does not guarantee a sufficiently deep reservoir of diffuse support to protect it from successful efforts at structural change or dissolution, (2) despite previous evidence that multilateral constitutional processes result in increased court independence (Dargent, 2009), we conclude that multi-party institutional arrangements are more vulnerable to the types of crisis that cause them to seek to use courts and their legitimacy to achieve political goals thereby limiting previous gains in independence, and (3) a court's institutional legitimacy is enhanced when it survives political threats from other branches of government. The crisis in Ecuador is used to demonstrate the challenges facing newer democracies with continuing multilateral conflict as well as the utility of thinking about how, why and when political institutions attack high courts and how the judiciary and citizens respond.     

Agenda Setting,Public Opinion,and the Issue of Immigration Reform*

Objective. Agenda‐setting theory is used to motivate hypotheses about how media coverage of immigration influences public perceptions of its importance. The authors seek to offer a more complete explanation of public opinion on immigration by exploring differences in the effects of immigration news in border and nonborder states. Method. This article employs content analyses of newspaper coverage of immigration and Gallup public opinion data over a 12‐month period (January–December 2006). Respondents' identification of immigration as a “Most Important Problem” is modeled as a conditional relationship between border state/nonborder state residence and media coverage, ethnic context, and individual‐level demographics. Results. Media attention to immigration is greater in border states than in nonborder states; as a result, residents of border states are more likely to identify immigration as a most important problem than are residents of nonborder states. Conclusions. The analyses point to the importance of geography and news coverage in explanations of public opinion on immigration.     

Determinants of Household Insurance Coverage Among Low‐Income Families from Boston,Chicago, and San Antonio: Evidence from the Three‐City Study*

Objectives. In this article we examine correlates of health insurance coverage for low‐income households. Methods. Using data from the Welfare, Children, and Families Project (1999–2001), a sample of 2,402 low‐income families from Boston, Chicago, and San Antonio, we estimate two logistic regressions, one that predicts health insurance coverage for one focal child in each household and another that assesses the odds that all children in the household have coverage. Results. The children of poorly‐educated, immigrant, and Mexican‐origin parents are at an elevated risk of lacking insurance. These characteristics also increase the risk of incomplete household coverage. Mexican‐origin children and households are at particularly high risk of lacking complete coverage, a fact partially reflecting their residential concentration in states with high uninsurance rates, such as Texas. Conclusions. Serious holes in the health‐care safety net affect poor Americans differently based on their state of residence, race, ethnicity, and household structure.     

Race,Political Empowerment,and Minority Perceptions of Judicial Fairness*

Objective. Recent studies of the impact of black elite electoral success on the system‐supporting attitudes of black citizens have yielded mixed, but generally unimpressive, empirical results. We extend this limited research by examining the effects of the presence of black judicial officials on public attitudes toward a state judicial system. Methods. We employ data from a telephone survey of citizens in Mississippi and develop multivariate models to test for the effects of black judges on citizens' evaluations of the fairness of judges, equity in sentences, and overall impartiality of the state judicial system. Results. We find no systematic evidence that the election of black judicial officials ameliorates the suspicions of the black public regarding the fairness of the state courts. Conclusions. Our findings are in line with other recent studies on the limited effects of black elite electoral success on the attitudes of the black public and generally support a “political reality” model of political trust rather than an “empowerment model.”     

Improving decision‐making in care order proceedings: A multijurisdictional study of court decision‐makers' viewpoints

Child welfare removals of children are among the most invasive decisions a state can make toward its citizens, and typically it is the courts that make these decisions. These interventions are regularly exposed to criticism. In this paper, we examine if and how care order proceedings could be improved in England, Finland, Norway, and California, USA. We have asked the judiciary decision‐makers about their view on what should be improved. Our findings show that the organization of the proceedings, including time and staff, are identified as issues in all four systems. Furthermore, the preparations by the child welfare agency are also mentioned as an issue, for English, Finnish, and Californian decision‐makers. Very few decision‐makers indicate features related to the individual, situational, and contextual dimensions, which is interesting since this would be expected from organization theory. The strong call for change in the way proceedings are organized indicates a need for modernization as well as better use of available competency from child development experts. The respondents focus on the elements that a decision‐maker has direct experience with and knowledge about, and this is indeed worth noting for policymakers in the four systems.     

The complex nature of juvenile court judges’ transfer decisions: A study of judicial attitudes

A fundamental premise behind the judicial transfer (used in 46 of 50 states) decision is that serious and repeat juvenile offenders have little or no chance of rehabilitation in the Juvenile Justice System. Those juveniles who are considered “untreatable” are believed to be best dealt with by criminal justice sentencing practices that emphasize retribution and deterrence. A survey was administered to juvenile court judges (1,040) across the United States to explore the possible role of attitudes on judicial transfer decisions. The findings indicate that judges’ attitudes as well as other factors such as type and severity of abuse, the type of weapon used in an offense, the number of participants involved, and the use of a drug affect their transfer decisions. Importantly, the results also suggest that in addition to legal factors judicial transfer decisions may be affected by a complex array of socio-cultural and psychological factors.     

Women Running for Judge: The Impact of Sex on Candidate Success in State Intermediate Appellate Court Elections*

Objective. This article will examine whether candidate sex impacts electoral outcomes in judicial elections. Methods. We examine the success of male and female candidates in contested, nonretention elections for state intermediate appellate courts (IACs) from 2000–2006 using OLS and logistic regression analysis. Results. We find that there is no systematic bias against women candidates in IAC races over this period. In fact, there is some evidence that women may actually perform slightly better than men. Conclusions. Contrary to the claims of some scholars, these results suggest judicial elections do not hinder diversity on the state appellate bench.     

Driven by politics: agenda setting and policy-making in Hungary 2010–2014

Studies on media and politics generally find an effect of the media on the symbolic policy agenda. Analysing data from the Hungarian Comparative Agendas Project, we demonstrate that this effect is extremely weak in the Hungarian policy-making process. We identified those issues that received greater than average coverage in the media. However, we found that in the majority of cases governmental initiatives or decisions preceded the media coverage – that is, instead of the media agenda pulling the policy agenda, the general logic is the opposite: the media are talking about the policy initiatives of the government. The ambition of the paper is twofold. First, our findings reinforce those claims in the literature that point to the many institutional and political factors affecting the media-politics nexus. This suggests that policy-making might be very different in new(er) democracies. Second, our research analyses the policy-making side of Viktor Orbán’s governance. Changes in the polity, democratic backlash and illiberal tendencies are usually the focus concerning the political changes in Hungary since 2010, but no attention has been devoted to how this type of governance is reflected in policy-making. Our paper seeks to make a contribution also in this respect.