Donald Songer
Biographic Data
| ID | 1052747 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Donald Songer |
| GIVEN NAMES | Donald |
| FAMILY NAME | Songer |
| SIGNATURE | SONGER D |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of South Carolina |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 5 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 126 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 5 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1988 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2003 |
| H-INDEX | 4 |
Presidential Success Through Appointments To The United States Courts Of Appeals
An enduring legacy for any president is achieved by appointing judges with similar policy preferences who then maintain those policy preferences during their tenure on the bench and long after leaving office. This process provides one of the few democratic checks on the judiciary. Some authors demonstrate that in the areas of social and economic policy, Supreme Court justices’ policy votes are concordant with their appointing presidents over time…
Why the Haves Don't Always Come out Ahead
Why the Haves Don't Always Come Out Ahead
The question of who wins and loses in American courts has traditionally been viewed as one of the central questions in the study of judicial politics. State supreme courts are particularly important in this regard since they are the final arbiters for the vast majority of litigation in the nation. In this article we examine the relationship between the status of litigants, especially the comparison of repeat player “haves” to oneshotters who are …
Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy
We examine how the Supreme Court uses signals and indices from lower courts to determine which cases to review. In our game theoretic model, a higher court cues from publicly observable case facts, the known preferences of a lower court, and its decision. The lower court attempts to enforce its own preferences, exploiting ambiguity in cases' fact patterns. In equilibrium, a conservative higher court declines to review conservative decisions from …
Presidential Effects on Criminal Justice Policy in the Lower Federal Courts
Scholarly and media accounts have portrayed the Reagan administration as strongly committed to the selection of judges who are ideologically in tune with the president. Interviews with key congressional participants indicate that Reagan has received substantial home-state support for his ideological selection criteria. These findings lead to the prediction that Reagan judges on the lower federal courts will be substantially less supportive of cri…
Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy
We examine how the Supreme Court uses signals and indices from lower courts to determine which cases to review. In our game theoretic model, a higher court cues from publicly observable case facts, the known preferences of a lower court, and its decision. The lower court attempts to enforce its own preferences, exploiting ambiguity in cases' fact patterns. In equilibrium, a conservative higher court declines to review conservative decisions from …
Why the Haves Don't Always Come Out Ahead
The question of who wins and loses in American courts has traditionally been viewed as one of the central questions in the study of judicial politics. State supreme courts are particularly important in this regard since they are the final arbiters for the vast majority of litigation in the nation. In this article we examine the relationship between the status of litigants, especially the comparison of repeat player “haves” to oneshotters who are …
Presidential Effects on Criminal Justice Policy in the Lower Federal Courts
Scholarly and media accounts have portrayed the Reagan administration as strongly committed to the selection of judges who are ideologically in tune with the president. Interviews with key congressional participants indicate that Reagan has received substantial home-state support for his ideological selection criteria. These findings lead to the prediction that Reagan judges on the lower federal courts will be substantially less supportive of cri…
Why the Haves Don't Always Come out Ahead
Presidential Success Through Appointments To The United States Courts Of Appeals
An enduring legacy for any president is achieved by appointing judges with similar policy preferences who then maintain those policy preferences during their tenure on the bench and long after leaving office. This process provides one of the few democratic checks on the judiciary. Some authors demonstrate that in the areas of social and economic policy, Supreme Court justices’ policy votes are concordant with their appointing presidents over time…
Presidential Effects on Criminal Justice Policy in the Lower Federal Courts
Scholarly and media accounts have portrayed the Reagan administration as strongly committed to the selection of judges who are ideologically in tune with the president. Interviews with key congressional participants indicate that Reagan has received substantial home-state support for his ideological selection criteria. These findings lead to the prediction that Reagan judges on the lower federal courts will be substantially less supportive of cri…
Why the Haves Don't Always Come out Ahead
Why the Haves Don't Always Come Out Ahead
The question of who wins and loses in American courts has traditionally been viewed as one of the central questions in the study of judicial politics. State supreme courts are particularly important in this regard since they are the final arbiters for the vast majority of litigation in the nation. In this article we examine the relationship between the status of litigants, especially the comparison of repeat player “haves” to oneshotters who are …
Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy
We examine how the Supreme Court uses signals and indices from lower courts to determine which cases to review. In our game theoretic model, a higher court cues from publicly observable case facts, the known preferences of a lower court, and its decision. The lower court attempts to enforce its own preferences, exploiting ambiguity in cases' fact patterns. In equilibrium, a conservative higher court declines to review conservative decisions from …
Presidential Success Through Appointments To The United States Courts Of Appeals
An enduring legacy for any president is achieved by appointing judges with similar policy preferences who then maintain those policy preferences during their tenure on the bench and long after leaving office. This process provides one of the few democratic checks on the judiciary. Some authors demonstrate that in the areas of social and economic policy, Supreme Court justices’ policy votes are concordant with their appointing presidents over time…
Law (5 works) · Political science (5 works) · Judicial and Constitutional Studies (4 works) · Law (4 works) · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (4 works) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (4 works) · Politics (4 works) · Supreme court (3 works) · Disadvantaged (2 works) · Presidential system (2 works)