Wendy L Martinek
Datos Biográficos
| ID | 1493229 |
|---|---|
| NOMBRE | Wendy L Martinek |
| NOMBRES | Wendy L |
| APELLIDO | Martinek |
| FIRMA | MARTINEK W L |
| AFILIACIONES | Binghamton University |
| ORCID | 0009-0002-1223-3576 |
| VERIFICADO | Sí |
| TOTAL DE OBRAS | 11 |
| TOTAL DE CITAS | 200 |
| TOTAL COMO AUTOR | 11 |
| TOTAL COMO EDITOR | 0 |
| PRIMER AÑO DE PUBLICACIÓN | 2002 |
| AÑO MÁS RECIENTE DE PUBLICACIÓN | 2017 |
| ÍNDICE H | 8 |
A Review of Textbooks for Teaching Graduate Research Methods
An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Judges and Friends
We contribute to the literature on political psychology, interest groups, and judicial decision making by examining whether ideology mediates the effect of amicus curiae briefs on decision making in the U.S. courts of appeals. Using an original data set, we find evidence that moderate and conservative judges are influenced by amicus briefs, but that liberal judges do not respond to these persuasion attempts. We conclude that this form of interest…
Friends of the Circuits
Objective. Though there is an extensive literature focused on the participation and efficacy of interest group amici curiae in the U.S. Supreme Court, there is little rigorous analysis of amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Here, we systematically analyze the influence of amicus curiae briefs on U.S. Court of Appeals decision making to provide insights regarding both judicial decision making and the efficacy of interest groups. Methods. W…
The Effects of Race and Gender on the Judicial Ambitions of State Trial Court Judges
The intersection of gender—and to a lesser extent, race—and political ambition has been the subject of considerable research. To date, however, analyses of the intersection of political ambition, race, and gender in the context of the judiciary have been limited. The authors seek to remedy this deficiency with the use of data from a recent survey of justices of the New York State Supreme Court, the major trial court in the State of New York. They…
Splitting the Difference
In rendering a decision in a particular case, judges are not limited to finding simply for the appellant or for the respondent. Rather, in many cases, they have the option to find for the former on one or more issues and for the latter on one or more other issues. By thus "splitting the difference," judges can render a judgment that favors both litigants to some degree. What accounts for such mixed outcomes? Several theoretical perspectives provi…
Amici Curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of law and courts know a great deal about amici curiae vis-à-vis the U.S. Supreme Court. Conversely, scholars know little to nothing about amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. This article begins to address this deficiency in our state of knowledge by examining the incidence of amici at the courts of appeals level. Drawing in part on the existing literature regarding amici in the Supreme Court, I develop a model of amicus curiae p…
Partisan Politics
Only a few studies of the lower federal court confirmation process consider the role of the race/gender of nominees in that process and none consider the intersection of party politics with those characteristics. We address this deficiency, arguing that the different electoral incentive structures of the two major parties have consequences for the treatment of minority and female nominees. The levels of minority and female support enjoyed by the …
Acclimation Effects and Separate Opinion Writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Objective. This article investigates the existence of a freshman effect on separate opinion authorship on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. First, we evaluate the extent to which freshman judges demonstrate unique behavior with respect to writing concurring and dissenting opinions. Second, we examine the potential for background factors to condition any freshman effect. Methods. Individual judges' decisions to author separate opinions, drawn from the C…
Comparing Attitudinal and Strategic Accounts of Dissenting Behavior on the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of judicial behavior have increasingly turned to strategic accounts to understand judicial decision making. Scholarship on the Supreme Court and state high courts suggests that the decision to dissent is better understood in light of strategic considerations rather than simply reflecting ideological disagreement. We investigate whether these findings comport with behavior by judges on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. We develop a spatial mode…
Separate Opinion Writing On The United States Courts Of Appeals
In this article, we set ourselves to the task of identifying the determinants of separate opinion writing on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Utilizing a new institutional theoretical framework, we evaluate a series of hypotheses concerning the connection between separate opinion writing behavior and attitudinal, institutional, and legal factors. Within this broad theoretical framework, we are particularly sensitive to the manner in which judges may a…
To Advise and Consent
Using nominations to Article III district and appeals court judgeships, we test a model of senatorial treatment of presidential nominations to the lower federal bench, looking both at outcome (whether or not a nomination culminates in confirmation) and process (the length of time it takes the Senate to process a nomination). We find evidence that nominee quality matters, as does composition of the Judiciary Committee and pending judicial nominati…
To Advise and Consent
Using nominations to Article III district and appeals court judgeships, we test a model of senatorial treatment of presidential nominations to the lower federal bench, looking both at outcome (whether or not a nomination culminates in confirmation) and process (the length of time it takes the Senate to process a nomination). We find evidence that nominee quality matters, as does composition of the Judiciary Committee and pending judicial nominati…
Comparing Attitudinal and Strategic Accounts of Dissenting Behavior on the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of judicial behavior have increasingly turned to strategic accounts to understand judicial decision making. Scholarship on the Supreme Court and state high courts suggests that the decision to dissent is better understood in light of strategic considerations rather than simply reflecting ideological disagreement. We investigate whether these findings comport with behavior by judges on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. We develop a spatial mode…
The Effects of Race and Gender on the Judicial Ambitions of State Trial Court Judges
The intersection of gender—and to a lesser extent, race—and political ambition has been the subject of considerable research. To date, however, analyses of the intersection of political ambition, race, and gender in the context of the judiciary have been limited. The authors seek to remedy this deficiency with the use of data from a recent survey of justices of the New York State Supreme Court, the major trial court in the State of New York. They…
Acclimation Effects and Separate Opinion Writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Objective. This article investigates the existence of a freshman effect on separate opinion authorship on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. First, we evaluate the extent to which freshman judges demonstrate unique behavior with respect to writing concurring and dissenting opinions. Second, we examine the potential for background factors to condition any freshman effect. Methods. Individual judges' decisions to author separate opinions, drawn from the C…
Separate Opinion Writing On The United States Courts Of Appeals
In this article, we set ourselves to the task of identifying the determinants of separate opinion writing on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Utilizing a new institutional theoretical framework, we evaluate a series of hypotheses concerning the connection between separate opinion writing behavior and attitudinal, institutional, and legal factors. Within this broad theoretical framework, we are particularly sensitive to the manner in which judges may a…
Splitting the Difference
In rendering a decision in a particular case, judges are not limited to finding simply for the appellant or for the respondent. Rather, in many cases, they have the option to find for the former on one or more issues and for the latter on one or more other issues. By thus "splitting the difference," judges can render a judgment that favors both litigants to some degree. What accounts for such mixed outcomes? Several theoretical perspectives provi…
Partisan Politics
Only a few studies of the lower federal court confirmation process consider the role of the race/gender of nominees in that process and none consider the intersection of party politics with those characteristics. We address this deficiency, arguing that the different electoral incentive structures of the two major parties have consequences for the treatment of minority and female nominees. The levels of minority and female support enjoyed by the …
Amici Curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of law and courts know a great deal about amici curiae vis-à-vis the U.S. Supreme Court. Conversely, scholars know little to nothing about amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. This article begins to address this deficiency in our state of knowledge by examining the incidence of amici at the courts of appeals level. Drawing in part on the existing literature regarding amici in the Supreme Court, I develop a model of amicus curiae p…
Judges and Friends
We contribute to the literature on political psychology, interest groups, and judicial decision making by examining whether ideology mediates the effect of amicus curiae briefs on decision making in the U.S. courts of appeals. Using an original data set, we find evidence that moderate and conservative judges are influenced by amicus briefs, but that liberal judges do not respond to these persuasion attempts. We conclude that this form of interest…
Friends of the Circuits
Objective. Though there is an extensive literature focused on the participation and efficacy of interest group amici curiae in the U.S. Supreme Court, there is little rigorous analysis of amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Here, we systematically analyze the influence of amicus curiae briefs on U.S. Court of Appeals decision making to provide insights regarding both judicial decision making and the efficacy of interest groups. Methods. W…
To Advise and Consent
Using nominations to Article III district and appeals court judgeships, we test a model of senatorial treatment of presidential nominations to the lower federal bench, looking both at outcome (whether or not a nomination culminates in confirmation) and process (the length of time it takes the Senate to process a nomination). We find evidence that nominee quality matters, as does composition of the Judiciary Committee and pending judicial nominati…
Acclimation Effects and Separate Opinion Writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Objective. This article investigates the existence of a freshman effect on separate opinion authorship on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. First, we evaluate the extent to which freshman judges demonstrate unique behavior with respect to writing concurring and dissenting opinions. Second, we examine the potential for background factors to condition any freshman effect. Methods. Individual judges' decisions to author separate opinions, drawn from the C…
Comparing Attitudinal and Strategic Accounts of Dissenting Behavior on the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of judicial behavior have increasingly turned to strategic accounts to understand judicial decision making. Scholarship on the Supreme Court and state high courts suggests that the decision to dissent is better understood in light of strategic considerations rather than simply reflecting ideological disagreement. We investigate whether these findings comport with behavior by judges on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. We develop a spatial mode…
Separate Opinion Writing On The United States Courts Of Appeals
In this article, we set ourselves to the task of identifying the determinants of separate opinion writing on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Utilizing a new institutional theoretical framework, we evaluate a series of hypotheses concerning the connection between separate opinion writing behavior and attitudinal, institutional, and legal factors. Within this broad theoretical framework, we are particularly sensitive to the manner in which judges may a…
Partisan Politics
Only a few studies of the lower federal court confirmation process consider the role of the race/gender of nominees in that process and none consider the intersection of party politics with those characteristics. We address this deficiency, arguing that the different electoral incentive structures of the two major parties have consequences for the treatment of minority and female nominees. The levels of minority and female support enjoyed by the …
Amici Curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Students of law and courts know a great deal about amici curiae vis-à-vis the U.S. Supreme Court. Conversely, scholars know little to nothing about amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. This article begins to address this deficiency in our state of knowledge by examining the incidence of amici at the courts of appeals level. Drawing in part on the existing literature regarding amici in the Supreme Court, I develop a model of amicus curiae p…
Splitting the Difference
In rendering a decision in a particular case, judges are not limited to finding simply for the appellant or for the respondent. Rather, in many cases, they have the option to find for the former on one or more issues and for the latter on one or more other issues. By thus "splitting the difference," judges can render a judgment that favors both litigants to some degree. What accounts for such mixed outcomes? Several theoretical perspectives provi…
The Effects of Race and Gender on the Judicial Ambitions of State Trial Court Judges
The intersection of gender—and to a lesser extent, race—and political ambition has been the subject of considerable research. To date, however, analyses of the intersection of political ambition, race, and gender in the context of the judiciary have been limited. The authors seek to remedy this deficiency with the use of data from a recent survey of justices of the New York State Supreme Court, the major trial court in the State of New York. They…
Friends of the Circuits
Objective. Though there is an extensive literature focused on the participation and efficacy of interest group amici curiae in the U.S. Supreme Court, there is little rigorous analysis of amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Here, we systematically analyze the influence of amicus curiae briefs on U.S. Court of Appeals decision making to provide insights regarding both judicial decision making and the efficacy of interest groups. Methods. W…
Judges and Friends
We contribute to the literature on political psychology, interest groups, and judicial decision making by examining whether ideology mediates the effect of amicus curiae briefs on decision making in the U.S. courts of appeals. Using an original data set, we find evidence that moderate and conservative judges are influenced by amicus briefs, but that liberal judges do not respond to these persuasion attempts. We conclude that this form of interest…
A Review of Textbooks for Teaching Graduate Research Methods
An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button
Judicial and Constitutional Studies (10 obras) · Law (10 obras) · Political science (10 obras) · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (7 obras) · Politics (7 obras) · Psychology (7 obras) · Law (6 obras) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (6 obras) · Supreme court (5 obras) · Economics (4 obras)