No abstract

No abstract

President Clinton, like Carter before him, has made a concerted effort to appoint women and minorities to the federal bench in an effort to make the courts appear representative of American society. The question remains, does this symbolic representation translate into substantive or policy representation on the bench? This analysis is based on data colected about pairs of Clinton's district court appointees who are similar in a number of respects but different in their race or gender. The rulings by these pairs, made in cases involving a number of issues expected to preent racial and gender differences, were compared to determine whether Clinton's nontraditional district court judges provided substantive as well as symbolic representation. The results indicate that these judges do not provide policy representation to their respective groups, nor do they appear particularly liberal or activist, as many of Clinton's political oppnents have alleged.

Beginning with the recognition that the Supreme Court is the most invisible branch of American government and the one that most Americans know the least about, this book examines the way in which television news, the primary source of the public's limited knowledge, covers the Supreme Court. The book relies on rich interviews with network news reporters who have covered the Court, coupled with actual videotapes of network newscast coverage, to develop a unique portrait of the constraints faced by reporters covering the institution as well as a thorough picture of what facets of the Court's work actually are covered by television news. The analysis demonstrates convincingly that there are characteristics of the television news industry (such as its heavy reliance on dramatic stories and visuals) that, coupled with the rules and habits of the Supreme Court (such as its refusal to allow cameras in the Court as well as its propensity to announce several critical rulings on the same day) come together to make network news coverage of the Court infrequent, brief, and in too many instances, simply plain wrong.

No abstract