Author's Keywords: Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, immigration, law, courts	Convention All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41145_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Law, Anna. "The Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and Immigration Cases: A Case Study of Segmented Institutional Development" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2008-10-09 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41145_index.html>

Law, A. O. , 2005-09-01 "The Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, and Immigration Cases: A Case Study of Segmented Institutional Development" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <PDF>. 2008-10-09 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p41145_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: The paper assess the changing role and missions of the Supreme Court and U.S. Courts of Appeals over time. My arguement is that each court's instituional development path is disimmilar. By the 1990s, we see the two courts operating in quite different instituional contexts which has consequences for the way the courts adjudicate cases as observable in the way they cope with rising caseloads. The paper is based on over 1,700 legal opinions on immigration from the Supreme Court and circuit courts/U.S. Courts of Appeals that were drawn from two time periods: 1801-1901 and 1990-2000. The cases were analyzed for patterns in modes of legal reasoning or the rationale that judges used for reaching their result. These modes of legal reasoning provide some insight into the way judges conceive of the immigration question over time. While the early circuit courts/U.S. Courts of Appeals towed the doctrinal line and closely follow Supreme Court precedent in 1801-1901, by the 1990s the U.S. Courts of Appeals have begun deciding cases with a mode of legal reasoning dissimilar to Supreme Court precedent. Moreover, the paper presents evidence that the U.S. Courts of Appeals have engaged in creative statutory interpretation to reach their desired result that is different from Supreme Court precedent and congressional intent.

Deciding to Reach the Merits: An Examination of Supreme Court and Circuit Court Judicial Power Cases

Institutional Rules, Structures, and Arrangements and their Influence on Supreme Court and Circuit Court Behavior in American Immigration Law