Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This Article offers a quantitative and qualitative assessment of strict scrutiny cases and argues against the common belief that strict scrutiny is "strict in theory and fatal in fact." That old addage does not accurately reflect the actual application of strict scrutiny in the federal district, circuit and Supreme courts, where, this Article reveals, laws survive at a surprisingly high rate. Strict scrutiny, it turns out, is fatal only in theory and really just strict in fact.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In this paper, I compare negligence and strict liability regimes with respect to their different abilities to generate the imposition of non-legal sanctions on defendants in torts. The analysis in this paper is based on the basic assumption that any given finding of a defendant as liable in torts is likely to subject him or her to more non-legal sanctions if reached under a negligence regime than if reached under a strict liability regime. However, it is not clear which regime will produce more non-legal sanctions overall, since a strict liability regime is likely to produce more findings of liability. The main distinction between the rival regimes’ respective potential to generate non-legal sanctions derives from the fact that, in findings of liability, a strict liability regime pools together negligent and non-negligent defendants. At both the allocative and distributive levels, this pooling effect is likely to lead to a reduction in the investment made by high-risk professionals in precaution costs. Low-risk professionals might either increase their investment in precaution (as the flip-side of this adverse selection coin) or, like the high-risk professionals, reduce that investment in a tragedy-of-the-commons. A strict liability regime might serve as a hedging mechanism for low-risk professionals against the significant reputation loss involved in being found liable under a negligence regime. At the aggregate level, a strict liability regime will produce more non-legal sanctions if market participants overestimate the proportion of faulty defendants out of the pool of defendants found liable under that regime.
The paper critically examines the assumption that a negligence regime is superior to strict liability in that it better signals to potential victims the inadequacy of the professionals being found liable and, in so doing, channels potential victims from higher-risk to lower-risk professionals and reduces the likelihood of occurrence of future accidents.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The Church of Scientology is examined as a case study in the formation and maintenance of religious commitment within a religious organization. We ask how the Church of Scientology produces and maintains religious commitment among its members in the face of social stigma and apparently high costs for membership. Drawing from rational choice literature regarding the study of religions, we develop a set of seven indicators whereby religious commitment is formed. We find that Scientology represents a religious movement satisfying a majority of our indicators.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Why did the Democratic Party split over the nomination of two candidates whose policy positions were almost indistinguishable? What was Obama vs. Clinton really about? And why did the Republican Party nominate a candidate disliked by so much of the party's base? Presidential nomination politics has often revealed schisms within the party coalitions. But are these divisions personal, ideological or strategic? I use a dataset of more than 8000 presidential nomination endorsements from 1972 to 2008 to identify the network of support in the nominating party, as well as the key players in that dynamic. I then apply social networks analysis techniques, including exponential random graph models, to explain those networks. Analysis gives insight into who is important, what groups are stable, and what characteristics lead them to act together. Preliminary results suggest that major cleavages in the party usually represent stable and persistent internal divisions in the party coalitions, rather than personal divisions driven by the identities of the candidates in each race. _x000d__x000d_This paper would be appropriate for panels on internal party conflict, theories of parties, social networks methods and presidential nominations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Are “strong” religious groups necessarily “strict”? This paper examines a major but understudied religious movement – New Buddhist Organizations (NBOs) in Taiwan – in the light of three variants of Strictness theories: Theological Strictness, Deviant Strictness, and Subcultural Identity. These theories highlight some interesting aspects of the movement, but ultimately NBOs belie the proposition that a strong, growing religious organization is necessarily “strict.” Rather than abandon the insights of Strictness theories altogether, the paper argues that they can contribute to understanding the success of religious groups as part of more broadly conceptualized strategies of boundary work. A multi-dimensional framework is proposed, separating three aspects of the content, structure, and mechanisms for religious groups’ boundary work. This expanded framework is shown to provide better leverage on understanding Taiwanese NBOs’ success than uni-dimensional Strictness theories. Further development of a more complex framework for understanding the boundary work of religious organizations should allow us to ask, not “are strict churches strong?” but “under what circumstances are certain strategies of boundary work more or less successful for religious organizations?”

Supporting Publications:
Supporting Document