Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Mark J Richards

Biographic Data

ID1075047
NAMEMark J Richards
GIVEN NAMESMark J
FAMILY NAMERichards
SIGNATURERICHARDS M J
AFFILIATIONSGrand Valley State University
ORCID0000-0002-0669-7879
VERIFIEDYes
TOTAL WORKS6
TOTAL CITATIONS142
AUTHOR COUNT6
EDITOR COUNT0
FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR2002
LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR2019
H-INDEX4
  • The Diffusion of the Concept of Public Figure in China

    Open Access•Yi Zhao, Mark J Richards et al.•ARTICLE•Law & Society Review•2019•References: 19

    This article considers how and why the legal concept of public figure, which holds public figures to a higher standard that makes it more difficult for them to recover damages when suing for libel, has been diffused in China. The public figure concept developed in the U.S. context as an extension of New York Times v. Sullivan from public officials to public figures, reflecting the deeply embedded value of freedom of expression. Despite authoritar…

  • Taking and Testing Jurisprudential Regimes Seriously

    Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•The Journal of Politics•2010•Cited by: 3•References: 3

    Lax and Rader critique our use of the Chow test in our series of articles on jurisprudential regimes on the grounds that individual justices votes are not statistically independent, which constitutes a violation of assumptions underlying the Chow test. In this response we point out that the Chow tests constituted only one part of our analysis; we also conducted a sensitivity analysis to look at the strength of the Chow tests compared to other seq…

  • Does Chevron Matter

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Joseph L Smith et al.•ARTICLE•Law & Policy•2006•Cited by: 6•References: 30

    In this article we evaluate whether the Supreme Court's much‐discussed decision in Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) signaled a lasting difference in how the justices decide administrative law cases, by comparing and testing the predictions of three distinct theories of Supreme Court behavior. The legal model predicts an increase in deference to administrative agencies. This prediction is shared by the jurisprudential regime mode…

  • The Influence of Law in the Supreme Court’s Search-and-Seizure Jurisprudence

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•American Politics Research•2005•Cited by: 12•References: 15

    In this research note/replication, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article to the jurisprudential area of search and seizure. Given the centrality of this area of Supreme Court decision making in the core studies supporting the attitudinal model, replicating our analysis of the jurisprudential regime construct in this area provides an important test of the concept. Our results produce strong support fo…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•Law & Society Review•2003•Cited by: 27•References: 14

    In this research note, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article in American Political Science Review to the area of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. We hypothesize that Lemon v. Kurtzman represented a jurisprudential regime in the Supreme Court's decisionmaking in this area of law. Our analysis shows that the predictors of the Court's decisions in the two periods differed in ways that are very consis…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Herbert M Kritzer•ARTICLE•American Political Science Review•2002•Cited by: 94•References: 27

    We theorize that if law matters in Supreme Court decision making, it matters not as a mechanistic force that dictates decisions, but as an institutional construct created by justices who possess political attitudes. Jurisprudential regimes identify relevant case factors and/or set the level of scrutiny or balancing the justices will use. These jurisprudential regimes have the potential to make a significant difference in the decisions of the just…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Herbert M Kritzer•ARTICLE•American Political Science Review•2002•Cited by: 94•References: 27

    We theorize that if law matters in Supreme Court decision making, it matters not as a mechanistic force that dictates decisions, but as an institutional construct created by justices who possess political attitudes. Jurisprudential regimes identify relevant case factors and/or set the level of scrutiny or balancing the justices will use. These jurisprudential regimes have the potential to make a significant difference in the decisions of the just…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•Law & Society Review•2003•Cited by: 27•References: 14

    In this research note, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article in American Political Science Review to the area of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. We hypothesize that Lemon v. Kurtzman represented a jurisprudential regime in the Supreme Court's decisionmaking in this area of law. Our analysis shows that the predictors of the Court's decisions in the two periods differed in ways that are very consis…

  • The Influence of Law in the Supreme Court’s Search-and-Seizure Jurisprudence

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•American Politics Research•2005•Cited by: 12•References: 15

    In this research note/replication, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article to the jurisprudential area of search and seizure. Given the centrality of this area of Supreme Court decision making in the core studies supporting the attitudinal model, replicating our analysis of the jurisprudential regime construct in this area provides an important test of the concept. Our results produce strong support fo…

  • Does Chevron Matter

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Joseph L Smith et al.•ARTICLE•Law & Policy•2006•Cited by: 6•References: 30

    In this article we evaluate whether the Supreme Court's much‐discussed decision in Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) signaled a lasting difference in how the justices decide administrative law cases, by comparing and testing the predictions of three distinct theories of Supreme Court behavior. The legal model predicts an increase in deference to administrative agencies. This prediction is shared by the jurisprudential regime mode…

  • Taking and Testing Jurisprudential Regimes Seriously

    Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•The Journal of Politics•2010•Cited by: 3•References: 3

    Lax and Rader critique our use of the Chow test in our series of articles on jurisprudential regimes on the grounds that individual justices votes are not statistically independent, which constitutes a violation of assumptions underlying the Chow test. In this response we point out that the Chow tests constituted only one part of our analysis; we also conducted a sensitivity analysis to look at the strength of the Chow tests compared to other seq…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Herbert M Kritzer•ARTICLE•American Political Science Review•2002•Cited by: 94•References: 27

    We theorize that if law matters in Supreme Court decision making, it matters not as a mechanistic force that dictates decisions, but as an institutional construct created by justices who possess political attitudes. Jurisprudential regimes identify relevant case factors and/or set the level of scrutiny or balancing the justices will use. These jurisprudential regimes have the potential to make a significant difference in the decisions of the just…

  • Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•Law & Society Review•2003•Cited by: 27•References: 14

    In this research note, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article in American Political Science Review to the area of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. We hypothesize that Lemon v. Kurtzman represented a jurisprudential regime in the Supreme Court's decisionmaking in this area of law. Our analysis shows that the predictors of the Court's decisions in the two periods differed in ways that are very consis…

  • The Influence of Law in the Supreme Court’s Search-and-Seizure Jurisprudence

    Open Access•Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•American Politics Research•2005•Cited by: 12•References: 15

    In this research note/replication, we apply the construct of jurisprudential regimes as described in our recent article to the jurisprudential area of search and seizure. Given the centrality of this area of Supreme Court decision making in the core studies supporting the attitudinal model, replicating our analysis of the jurisprudential regime construct in this area provides an important test of the concept. Our results produce strong support fo…

  • Does Chevron Matter

    Open Access•Mark J Richards, Joseph L Smith et al.•ARTICLE•Law & Policy•2006•Cited by: 6•References: 30

    In this article we evaluate whether the Supreme Court's much‐discussed decision in Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council (1984) signaled a lasting difference in how the justices decide administrative law cases, by comparing and testing the predictions of three distinct theories of Supreme Court behavior. The legal model predicts an increase in deference to administrative agencies. This prediction is shared by the jurisprudential regime mode…

  • Taking and Testing Jurisprudential Regimes Seriously

    Herbert M Kritzer, Mark J Richards•ARTICLE•The Journal of Politics•2010•Cited by: 3•References: 3

    Lax and Rader critique our use of the Chow test in our series of articles on jurisprudential regimes on the grounds that individual justices votes are not statistically independent, which constitutes a violation of assumptions underlying the Chow test. In this response we point out that the Chow tests constituted only one part of our analysis; we also conducted a sensitivity analysis to look at the strength of the Chow tests compared to other seq…

  • The Diffusion of the Concept of Public Figure in China

    Open Access•Yi Zhao, Mark J Richards et al.•ARTICLE•Law & Society Review•2019•References: 19

    This article considers how and why the legal concept of public figure, which holds public figures to a higher standard that makes it more difficult for them to recover damages when suing for libel, has been diffused in China. The public figure concept developed in the U.S. context as an extension of New York Times v. Sullivan from public officials to public figures, reflecting the deeply embedded value of freedom of expression. Despite authoritar…

Judicial and Constitutional Studies (6 works) · Law (6 works) · Political science (6 works) · Law (5 works) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (5 works) · Computer Science (4 works) · Law and economics (4 works) · Supreme court (4 works) · Jurisprudence (3 works) · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (3 works)

Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae