Cookies?
Library Header Image
LSE Research Online LSE Library Services

Elected and appointed justices face different constraints inwriting opinions

Leonard, Meghan E. and Ross, Joseph V. (2015) Elected and appointed justices face different constraints inwriting opinions. USApp– American Politics and Policy Blog (17 Jun 2015). Blog Entry.

[img]
Preview
PDF - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (209kB) | Preview

Abstract

The majority opinion is the main vehicle for policy-making for state and federal courts. Longer opinions usually indicate a more detailed explanation of the decision of the majority. But is the length of these opinions influenced by whether justices are appointed or elected? In new research Meghan E. Leonard and Joseph V. Ross find that while the length of these opinions is not directly affected by how judges are selected, appointed justices write longer opinions when a separate opinion is filed or when the majority opinion author is not randomly selected, as compared to states where justices are selected through contestable elections.

Item Type: Online resource (Blog Entry)
Official URL: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/
Additional Information: © 2015 The Authors, USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog, The London School of Economics and Political Science.; Online
Divisions: LSE
Subjects: H Social Sciences > HA Statistics
K Law > KF United States Federal Law
Sets: Collections > LSE American Politics and Policy (USAPP) Blog
Date Deposited: 10 Jul 2015 11:45
Last Modified: 28 Jul 2019 23:41
URI: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/62661

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics