How Judges Judge
Issue Date
2011Author
Yung, Corey Rayburn
Publisher
Northwestern University School of Law
Type
Article
Version
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1758710
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
This Article offers a new approach to understanding judicial behavior which recognizes judicial heterogeneity, behavior along different dimensions, and interconnectedness among judges at different levels within the judiciary. As a result, it calls into question those fundamental premises of the predominant theories of judicial decisionmaking utilized by legal and political science scholars. This study utilizes a unique dataset of over 30,000 judicial votes from eleven federal courts of appeals in 2008. Utilizing independent measures of judicial activism, ideology, independence, and partisanship, statistical cluster analysis identifies nine distinct judging styles: Trailblazing, Consensus Building, Stalwart, Regulating, Steadfast, Collegial, Incrementalist, Minimalist, and Error Correcting. These judicial style types offer a fuller and more accurate account of judicial behavior than any of the prior models utilized by scholars.
Description
Full-text available at SSRN. See link in this record.
Collections
Citation
Corey Rayburn Yung, How Judges Judge, NW. U. L. REV. (forthcoming).
Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
We want to hear from you! Please share your stories about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.