Saltar al contenido principal

ETHNOS_APP

Inicio • Búsqueda • Revistas • Lista 0

The Effects of Ideology on Federal Trial Judges' Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6180180
AutoresJeremy Buchman, Jeremy L Buchman (Long Island University, autor de correspondencia)
Año2007
Volumen35
Número5
Páginas671-693
Fecha de publicación2007-09-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaAmerican Politics Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1532-673X • E-ISSN: 1552-3373
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1532673x07302339
OpenAlexW2082433983
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas6
Referencias citadas30

This article examines trial court rulings concerning the admissibility of scientific expert testimony. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the trial judge's role as a “gatekeeper” and gave trial judges substantial discretion over their scrutiny of expert testimony. Because the external constraints on admissibility rulings are minimal, one might expect that if trial judges' ideology were to play some role in their decision making, it might do so here. To test this expectation, I perform a binomial logit analysis of federal district court Daubert rulings in tort cases from 1983 to 2003. I find substantial support for the claim that trial judges' ideology can predict decisions on admissibility. I find less support, however, for the claim that Daubert affected trial judges' willingness to admit such testimony, and no evidence that such decisions are affected by the prospect of reversal on appeal

Appeal · Discretion · Federal Rules of Evidence · Ideology · Political science · Politics · Scrutiny · Supreme court · Trial court · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues · Psychology

  • A Contextual Approach to the Admissibility of the State's Forensic Science and Medical Evidence

    Gary Edmond, Kent Roach•University of Toronto Law Journal•2011

  • Applications of Forensic Sociology and Criminology to Civil Litigation

    Open Access•Daniel B Kennedy•Journal of Applied Social Science•2013

  • Congressional Constraint? The Review of In Absentia Immigration Removal Orders in Federal Circuit Courts

    Open Access•Christina L Boyd, R F Carlos et al.•Political Research Quarterly•2023

  • Litigant status, judicial ideology, and the gatekeeping of expert evidence

    Open Access•Timothy O'Brien, Stephen Hawkin et al.•Law & Society Review•2026

  • Race, gender, and party in EEOC cases, 1996–2006

    Open Access•Sean Farhang, Gregory J Wawro et al.•American Journal of Political…•2026

  • Not just about the ruling

    Andreu Rodilla•South European Society & Politics•2025

  • The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal, Harold J Spaeth•Supreme Court and the Attitudinal…•2002

  • Judicial Partisanship and Obedience to Legal Doctrine

    Frank B Cross, Emerson H Tiller•The Yale Law Journal•1998

  • Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy

    J Ferejohn, Charles R Shipan et al.•The Journal of Law Economics and…•1990

  • Causal versus Constitutive Explanations (or, On the Difficulty of Being so Positive…)

    Open Access•Michael Mccann•Law & Social Inquiry•1996

  • What's Law Got to Do with It? Judicial Behavioralists Test the “Legal Model” of Judicial Decision Making

    Open Access•Howard Gillman•Law & Social Inquiry•2001

  • Information and Judicial Review

    James R Rogers•American Journal of Political…•2001

  • Rights at Work

    Robert L Nelson, Michael W Mccann et al.•Contemporary Sociology A Journal…•1995

  • What Has a Decade of Daubert Wrought

    Margaret A Berger•American Journal of Public Health•2005

  • The Courts and Social Policy

    Keith O Boyum, Keith Boyum et al.•The Western Political Quarterly•1977

  • Picking Federal Judges

    Micheal W Giles, Virginia A Hettinger et al.•Political Research Quarterly•2001

  • Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices

    Open Access•Jeffrey A Segal, Albert D Cover•American Political Science Review•1989

  • Integrating Alternative Approaches to the Study of Judicial Voting

    Donald R Songer, Susan B Haire et al.•American Journal of Political…•1992

  • In Defense of Multiplicative Terms in Multiple Regression Equations

    R Friedrich, Robert J Friedrich•American Journal of Political…•1982

  • Judge and attorney experiences, practices, and concerns regarding expert testimony in federal civil trials

    Carol Krafka, Meghan A Dunn et al.•Psychology Public Policy and Law•2002

  • Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•Law & Society Review•2003

  • Why the "Haves" Come Out Ahead

    Open Access•M Galanter•Law & Society Review•1974

  • The Influence of Presidential Versus Home State Senatorial Preferences on the Policy Output of Judges on the United States District Courts

    Open Access•Susan W Johnson, Donald R Songer•Law & Society Review•2002

  • Political Jurisprudence, the "New Institutionalism," and the Future of Public Law

    Open Access•R M Smith•American Political Science Review•1988

  • The Impact of Party and Region on Voting Decisions in the United States Courts of Appeals, 1955-1986

    Open Access•Donald R Songer, Sue Davis•The Western Political Quarterly•1990

  • Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals, 1961-1964

    Open Access•Sheldon Goldman•American Political Science Review•1966

  • Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Herbert M Kritzer•American Political Science Review•2002

  • Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals Revisited

    Open Access•Sheldon Goldman•American Political Science Review•1975

Obras citantes distintas6
Citas por año0,4
Intervalo de citas2011 - 2026 (16)
Velocidad de citacióncurrent
Altamente citadoNo
Tipos de citaNeutras: 5
Ethnos_APP • Proyecto Open Source • Licencia MIT • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacidad y Cookies • Documentación de la API: api.ethnos.app/docs • Código de la API: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Código del Frontend: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae