Policy Preferences and Legal Interpretation

Farnsworth, Ward; Guzior, Dustin F.; Malani, Anup

doi:10.1086/668603

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The NRA often appealed to two Supreme Court cases, District of Columbia versus Heller 554 U.S 570 (2008) and Chicago versus McDonald 561 U.S. 742 (2010) as well as the Second Amendment to the United States’ Constitution as reasons that their preferred policy solutions of reducing regulation of firearms should be viewed as the proper course of action. Given that the construction and design of public policy (and the laws therein) has been demonstrated to communicate important beliefs and strategies that oftentimes produce cascading effects (see e.g., Farnsworth, Guzior, and Malani ; Schneider and Ingram ; Sidney ), we operationalize any reference, mention, or citation of a law or legal ruling as evidence. This reasoning is supported by legal scholars who argue that decision‐makers rely on legal precedent to help them make decisions (see e.g., Caldeira ).…”

Section: Evidence In Public Policy Scholarshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the role of evidence in the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violences firearm policy debate proximate to the December 14, 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. The groups member-directed policy narratives are operationalized with The Narrative Policy Framework (NPF), and new categories of evidence for the framework are developed. Analysis of 2,535 paragraphs of member newsletters indicates the groups display different patterns of narrative components. Evidence is associated with narrative elements, and that narrative strategy has a significant, but mixed relationship with evidence. Most importantly, findings indicate that evidence frequently co-occurs with characters, leading us to conclude that evidence has a buttressing, or supportive, role in policy narrative closely associated with character attributions. The findings expand the understanding of evidence in contentious policy debates and offer a new component for NPF theory.Este art ıculo examina el papel de la evidencia emp ırica en el debate de pol ıtica p ublica entre la Asociaci on Nacional de Rifles de los Estados Unidos y la "Campaña de Brady para Prevenir la Violencia por Armas de Fuego" poco tiempo despu es de los tiroteos del 14 de diciembre de 2012 en la escuela secundaria Sandy Hook. La narrativa de pol ıtica dirigida por los miembros de cada grupo es analizada bajo el Marco Te orico de Narrativa de Pol ıtica (NPF por sus siglas en ingl es), y nuevas categor ıas de evidencia son desarrolladas para el marco te orico. Analizando 2,535 p arrafos de los boletines enviados a miembros se encuentra que cada grupo exhibe usos diferentes en sus patrones de narrativa. La evidencia es asociada con elementos narrativos y la estrategia de narrativa tiene una relaci on significativa, aunque a veces mixta, con la evidencia. A un m as importante, los resultados muestran que la evidencia es frecuentemente usada con personajes, llev andonos a la conclusi on que la evidencia tiene un papel de refuerzo, o apoyo, en la narrativa pol ıtica que se asocia de forma estrecha con los atributos de un personaje. Estos resultados expanden el entendimiento de la evidencia en debates pol emicos y ofrecen un nuevo componente para el Marco Te orico de Narrativa de Pol ıtica.

show abstract

Section: Evidence In Public Policy Scholarshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the non-legal factors, such as the policy preferences, political context and the formal safeguards of judicial independence, affect judicial conduct. 18 Besides, the regulation concerning the selection and removal of judges significantly determines judicial independence, particularly in authoritarian regimes. 19 The reluctance to revisit earlier cases also deserves to mention.…”

Section: The Controversial Court Decisions: the Reasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

When the Court Decisions Encourage Deforestation in Indonesia: A Case of Tahura Mangrove Forest Project

Rosariani,

Widiatedja,

Qadam Shah

2023

IJLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The abstract presents a critical analysis of the role played by court decisions in the prevention of deforestation. Over the past few decades, Indonesia has witnessed extensive deforestation, primarily due to the expansion of oil palm and agriculture. This has had a significant impact on Bali's tourism industry, which heavily relies on this sector for development. The Tahura Mangrove Forest Project serves as an example of a tourism venture that has resulted in damage to the forested area. Despite the prohibition of commercial projects on protected land, the government issued a utilization permit for the construction of guest houses. Rather than effectively curbing deforestation, this study demonstrates how controversial court decisions have actually encouraged it. The courts' assertion that public interest groups lacked standing to challenge violations of forestry laws, which could potentially cause environmental harm, was based on the argument that the damage was only a possibility during the planning stage and could not be accurately quantified. This paper identifies three factors contributing to the judges' adoption of a narrow standing test: their limited judicial competence, reliance on the Supreme Court's existence, and corruption.

show abstract

“…These include ideological preferences (the attitudinal model), jurisprudence (legal and new‐institutional models), and strategic considerations relating to the preferences of the public, the executive branch, and other justices (rational choice models). Institutional arrangements, norms, and political context produce different environments for judicial decisionmakers and thus influence the weight and degree to which these different considerations affect their decisions (Clayton & Gillman ; Richards & Kritzer ; Feldman ; Bailey & Maltzman ; Epstein et al ; Farnsworth et al ). For instance, the influence of justices' attitudes on the votes they cast on the merits is conditioned on case selection mechanisms (Kastellec & Lax ; Eisenberg et al ), panel size and composition (Farhang & Wawro ; Eisenberg et al ; Tiller ), and political salience (Giles et al ).…”

Section: Modeling a Dcammentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideological influences on governance and regulation: The comparative case of supreme courts

Weinshall

Sommer

Ritov

2017

Regulation & Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A key influence on governance and regulation is the ideology of individual decisionmakers. However, certain branches of government -such as courts -while wielding wide ranging regulatory powers, are expected to do so with no attitudinal influence. We posit a dynamic response model to investigate attitudinal behavior in different national courts. Our ideological scores are estimated based on probability models that formalize the assumption that judicial decisions consist of ideological, strategic, and jurisprudential components. The Dynamic Comparative Attitudinal Measure estimates the attitudinal decisionmaking on the institution as a whole. Additionally, we estimate Ideological Ideal Point Preference for individual justices. Empirical results with original data for political and religious rights rulings in the Supreme Courts of the United States, Canada, India, the Philippines, and Israel corroborate the measuresˈ validity. Future studies can utilize Ideological Ideal Point Preference and the Dynamic Comparative Attitudinal Measure to cover additional courts, legal spheres, and time frames, and to estimate government deference.

show abstract

Policy Preferences and Legal Interpretation

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States

Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States

When the Court Decisions Encourage Deforestation in Indonesia: A Case of Tahura Mangrove Forest Project

Ideological influences on governance and regulation: The comparative case of supreme courts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About