Joseph V Ro
Dados Biográficos
| ID | 4179971 |
|---|---|
| NOME | Joseph V Ro |
| PRENOMES | Joseph V |
| SOBRENOME | Ro |
| ASSINATURA | RO J V |
| AFILIAÇÕES | Florida Gulf Coast University |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-3594-7408 |
| VERIFICADO | Sim |
| TOTAL DE OBRAS | 3 |
| TOTAL DE CITAÇÕES | 20 |
| TOTAL COMO AUTOR | 3 |
| TOTAL COMO EDITOR | 0 |
| PRIMEIRO ANO DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2014 |
| ANO MAIS RECENTE DE PUBLICAÇÃO | 2020 |
| ÍNDICE H | 3 |
Gender Diversity, Women’s Leadership, and Consensus in State Supreme Courts
In this article, we argue that the leadership of women as chief justice or the majority opinion author, as well as an increased presence of women on the panel, should increase the likelihood of unanimous decisions and the size of majority coalitions in state supreme courts. Using an original dataset of cases in three policy areas from all state supreme courts from 1990-2015, we uncover some surprising results. In some issue areas, majority coalit…
Understanding the Length of State Supreme Court Opinions
The writing of a majority opinion is the most important task for judges and justices on collegial courts because they must be able to explain and justify the court’s decision in a way that will be understood by other legal and political actors. For state supreme court justices, we argue that the opinion-writing process is driven by the information the opinion author has as well as internal institutional constraints. In this article, we examine th…
Consensus and Cooperation on State Supreme Courts
The opinion-writing process is a vital yet understudied aspect of judicial decision making on state supreme courts. We argue that this process is influenced by the political context and particularly by institutional rules that serve to reactivate and reinforce divisions among justices, leading to less cooperation on the court. We test our theory with original data comprising all education cases decided from 1995 to 2005 in all 50 states and find …
Consensus and Cooperation on State Supreme Courts
The opinion-writing process is a vital yet understudied aspect of judicial decision making on state supreme courts. We argue that this process is influenced by the political context and particularly by institutional rules that serve to reactivate and reinforce divisions among justices, leading to less cooperation on the court. We test our theory with original data comprising all education cases decided from 1995 to 2005 in all 50 states and find …
Gender Diversity, Women’s Leadership, and Consensus in State Supreme Courts
In this article, we argue that the leadership of women as chief justice or the majority opinion author, as well as an increased presence of women on the panel, should increase the likelihood of unanimous decisions and the size of majority coalitions in state supreme courts. Using an original dataset of cases in three policy areas from all state supreme courts from 1990-2015, we uncover some surprising results. In some issue areas, majority coalit…
Understanding the Length of State Supreme Court Opinions
The writing of a majority opinion is the most important task for judges and justices on collegial courts because they must be able to explain and justify the court’s decision in a way that will be understood by other legal and political actors. For state supreme court justices, we argue that the opinion-writing process is driven by the information the opinion author has as well as internal institutional constraints. In this article, we examine th…
Consensus and Cooperation on State Supreme Courts
The opinion-writing process is a vital yet understudied aspect of judicial decision making on state supreme courts. We argue that this process is influenced by the political context and particularly by institutional rules that serve to reactivate and reinforce divisions among justices, leading to less cooperation on the court. We test our theory with original data comprising all education cases decided from 1995 to 2005 in all 50 states and find …
Understanding the Length of State Supreme Court Opinions
The writing of a majority opinion is the most important task for judges and justices on collegial courts because they must be able to explain and justify the court’s decision in a way that will be understood by other legal and political actors. For state supreme court justices, we argue that the opinion-writing process is driven by the information the opinion author has as well as internal institutional constraints. In this article, we examine th…
Gender Diversity, Women’s Leadership, and Consensus in State Supreme Courts
In this article, we argue that the leadership of women as chief justice or the majority opinion author, as well as an increased presence of women on the panel, should increase the likelihood of unanimous decisions and the size of majority coalitions in state supreme courts. Using an original dataset of cases in three policy areas from all state supreme courts from 1990-2015, we uncover some surprising results. In some issue areas, majority coalit…
Judicial and Constitutional Studies (3 obras) · Law (3 obras) · Political science (3 obras) · State supreme court (3 obras) · Supreme court (3 obras) · Judicial opinion (2 obras) · Law (2 obras) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (2 obras) · Legal Education and Practice Innovations (2 obras) · Majority opinion (2 obras)