Taking Law Seriously
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6319632 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Barry Friedman (0000-0003-2455-7121, New York University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 4 |
| Issue | 02 |
| Publication date | 2006-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Perspectives on Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1537-5927 • E-ISSN: 1541-0986 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1537592706060178 |
| OpenAlex | W2132538662 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 32 |
| References cited | 35 |
The positive literature on judicial behavior has not received nearly the attention it deserves. That literature has a great deal to offer, both to legal scholars and to those who are concerned about the role of legal institutions generally. For example, the literature has the potential to help shed light on the ability of courts to protect rights and foster economic development. This article argues that the positive literature has failed to see its due in large part because positive scholars often do not take law and legal institutions seriously.\nThe article identifies three specific sets of problems with the positive scholarship, offering detailed suggestions on how positive scholars can avoid them. The first is the problem of normative bite: Too often positive scholars of judicial behavior seem to be trapped in their own disciplinary debates, without pausing to examine why it is that they are studying what courts and legal institutions do. Second, positive scholars need to pay greater attention to the norms of the law, i.e., how law and legal institutions operate. A skeptical stance toward law is fine, but that skepticism should not get in the way of accurately understanding properly the mechanics of law and legal institutions. Finally, empiricists in particular must take great care regarding the data upon which they rely. It is difficult to obtain good data on the workings of legal systems. Data that are readily available often present a distorted picture of the system being studied
Discipline · Empirical legal studies · Empiricism · Epistemology · Law and economics · Legal realism · Legal research · Normative · Political science · Scholarship · Skepticism · Sociology · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies · Philosophy
The Evolving View of the Law and Judicial Decision‐Making
The Downstream Effects of Certiorari
The Maintenance of Institutional Legitimacy in Supreme Court Justices’ Public Rhetoric
The Burden of Proof in Immigration Bond Decisions
Measuring the Issue Content of Supreme Court Opinions
Negative References to Amicus Briefs in Judicial Reasoning
Placing the Ball in Congress’ Court
Permutations of Judicial Power
Party Politics or Judicial Independence? The Regime Politics Literature Hits the Law Schools
Hierarchical and Collegial Politics on the U.S. Courts of Appeals
Minority will? A model of influential dissenting opinions
The Constraining Capacity of Legal Doctrine on the U.S. Supreme Court
Does Legal Doctrine Matter? Unpacking Law and Policy Preferences on the U.S. Supreme Court
Learning in the Judicial Hierarchy
Partisan Labels and Democratic Accountability
Media Attention and Deliberation on the Supreme Court
Influencing Enforcement
Endogenous Jurisprudential Regimes
The Genealogy of Law
Reconsidering Judicial Supremacy
Scope and precedent
Competing signals in the judicial hierarchy
The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine
Bias and Judging
Microfoundations of the Rule of Law
Locating Supreme Court Opinions in Doctrine Space
When Advocates Become Adjudicators
La frontière étatique, terme de l’aide humanitaire ? Une analyse du droit en action
How rational are justices on the Supreme Court of the United States? Doctrinal considerations during agenda setting
Precedent and Doctrine in a Complicated World
Constructing Legal Rules on Appellate Courts
Rule Creation in a Political Hierarchy
Judicial Partisanship and Obedience to Legal Doctrine
Unpacking the Court
The Common Law and Economic Growth
The Selection of Disputes for Litigation
Once More Unto the Breach
What's Law Got to Do with It? Judicial Behavioralists Test the “Legal Model” of Judicial Decision Making
International Law and International Relations Theory
The Norm of Consensus on the U.S. Supreme Court
Jurimetrics and Professor Mendelson
Supreme Court Justices as Human Decision Makers
Heresthetical Maneuvering on the US Supreme Court
Not the Whole Story
Fluidity on the Supreme Court
Fluidity on the United States Supreme Court
Majority Opinion Assignments and the Maintenance of the Original Coalition on the Warren Court
Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decisionmaking
Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically
The Defection of the Marginal Justice on the Warren Court
Voting Fluidity and the Attitudinal Model of Supreme Court Decision Making
On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making
Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making
Strategic Auditing in a Political Hierarchy
| Unique citing works | 32 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,68 |
| Citation span | 2007 - 2026 (20) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 32 |