Author's Keywords: Keywords: courts of appeals, public opinion	Convention Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote! 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/p65963_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Massie, Tajuana. "Public Opinion and the U.S. Courts of Appeals: A Cross-Sectional Time Series Model of External Influences on Ideological Changes in Courts of Appeals Decisions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts, Aug 28, 2002 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65963_index.html>

Massie, T. , 2002-08-28 "Public Opinion and the U.S. Courts of Appeals: A Cross-Sectional Time Series Model of External Influences on Ideological Changes in Courts of Appeals Decisions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p65963_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Research concerning judicial decision-making and behavior has made substantial progress over the past several decades, in developing theoretical and empirical propositions that describe the processes shaping judicial policy. However, in comparison to literature on the Supreme Court, empirical research on the lower federal courts is less well developed. In general, there is a paucity of scholarly research in judicial behavior that explores the influence of changing public opinion on the decisions of lower federal court judges. The present study seeks to advance our understanding of lower federal court decision-making by exploring the impact of public opinion with reference to voting behavior on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Specifically, the study utilizes a pooled cross-sectional time series model of U.S. Courts of Appeals decision-making, to explore the time-series dynamics of the relationship between courts of appeals decision-making and public opinion- both national and local public opinion. Other measures in the analysis include a measure of changing Supreme Court precedents, presidential ideology, majority composition in Congress, as well as, other external and internal influences on the decisions of these tribunals. The findings clearly demonstrate that courts of appeals justices are not sensitive to the current policy preferences of the public (both national and local). Instead the evidence suggests that it is the policy preferences of appeals courts judges themselves and other national policymakers, such as the president and Congress that are of the utmost importance in courts of appeals policy outputs.

Precedent or Ideology? Exploring the Influence of the U.S. Supreme Court on Decision-making by the U.S. Courts of Appeals

The Supreme Court in American Democracy: Unraveling the Linkages between Public Opinion and Judicial Decision-making