Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T06:18:28.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Presidential Effects on Criminal Justice Policy in the Lower Federal Courts: The Reagan Judges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

C. K. Rowland ,
Donald Songer  and
Robert A. Carp
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

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 criminal defendants than will Nixon or Carter appointees. Analysis of each appointment cohort's criminal justice decisions confirms this expectation for the district courts and courts of appeals. Indeed, the degree of polarization between the Reagan and Carter cohorts is unprecedented. However, this difference was due to the unexpectedly high support for criminal defendants exhibited by Carter appointees as well as the predicted low support provided by Reagan judges.

Type
Research Note
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , 1988 , pp. 191 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 by The Law and Society Association

Footnotes

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the University of Kansas Graduate Research Fund and the administrative support of the Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, in the conduct of this research.

References

BERKSON, Larry, and Susan B., CARBON (1980) The United States Circuit Judge Nominating Commission: Its Members, Procedures and Candidates. Chicago: American Judicature Society.Google Scholar
BOYUM, Keith, and Lynn, MATHER (eds.) (1983) Empirical Theories About Courts. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
CARP, Robert, and C. K., ROWLAND (1983) Policy Making and Politics in the Federal District Courts. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY ALMANAC (1985) Congressional Quarterly Almanac. Washington, DC; Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
FOWLER, W. Gary (1983) “A Comparison of Initial Recommendation Procedures: Judicial Selection Under Reagan and Carter,” 1 Yale Law and Policy Review 299.Google Scholar
GIBSON, James L. (1983) “From Simplicity to Complexity: The Development of Theory in the Study of Judicial Behavior,” 5 Political Behavior 7.Google Scholar
GOLDMAN, Sheldon (1985) “Reorganizing the Judiciary: The First Term Appointments,” 68 Judicature 313.Google Scholar
GOLDMAN, Sheldon (1981) “Carter's Judicial Appointments: A Lasting Legacy,” 64 Judicature 344.Google Scholar
GOLDMAN, Sheldon (1975) “Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals Revisited,” 69 American Political Science Review 491.Google Scholar
GOTTSCHALL, Jon (1986) “Reagan's Appointments to the U.S. Courts of Appeals: The Continuation of a Judicial Revolution,” 70 Judicature 48.Google Scholar
GOTTSCHALL, Jon (1983) “Carter's Judicial Appointments: The Influence of Affirmative Action and Merit Selection on Voting on the U.S. Courts of Appeals,” 67 Judicature 165.Google Scholar
HAMMOND, Kenneth, McCLELLAND, Gary, and Jeryl, MUMPOWER (1980) Human Judgment and Decision-Making: Theories, Methods and Procedures. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
JACKSON, Donald (1974) Judges. New York: Atheneun.Google Scholar
JACOB, Herbert (1983) “Presidential Address: Trial Courts in the United States: The Travails of Exploration,” 17 Law & Society Review 407.Google Scholar
NEFF, Alan (1981) “Breaking with Tradition: A Study of the U.S. District Judge Nominating Commissions,” 64 Judicature 256.Google Scholar
REPUBLICAN PARTY (1984) Republican Party Platform. Dallas: Republican National Committee.Google Scholar
REPUBLICAN PARTY (1980) Republican Party Platform. Detroit: Republican National Committee.Google Scholar
REYNOLDS, H.T. (1977) Analysis of Nominal Data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
ROWLAND, C. K., and Robert A., CARP (1983) “The Relative Effects of Maturation, Time Period, and Appointing President on District Judges' Policy Choices: A Cohort Analysis,” 5 Political Behavior 109.Google Scholar
ROWLAND, C. K., CARP, Robert A., and Ronald A., STIDHAM (1984) “Judges' Policy Choices and the Value Basis of Judicial Appointments: A Comparison of Support for Criminal Defendants Among Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy Appointees to the Federal District Courts,” 46 Journal of Politics 886.Google Scholar
SEGAL, Jeffrey (1986) “Supreme Court Justices as Human Decision Makers: An Individual-Level Analysis of the Search and Seizure Cases,” 48 Journal of Politics 938.Google Scholar
SLOTNICK, Elliot E. (1981) “Federal Appellate Judge Selection: Recruitment Changes and Unanswered Questions,” 6 Justice System Journal 283.Google Scholar
SLOTNICK, Elliot E. (1980) “Reforms in Judicial Selection: Will They Affect the Senates' Role?,” 64 Judicature 60.Google Scholar
SONGER, Donald R. (1982a) “Consensual and Nonconsensual Decisions in Unanimous Opinions of the United States Courts of Appeals,” 26 American Journal of Political Science 225.Google Scholar
SONGER, Donald R. (1982b) “The Policy Consequences of Senate Involvement in the Selection of Judges in the United States Courts of Appeals,” 35 Western Political Quarterly 107.Google Scholar
ULMER, S. Sidney (1969) “The Discriminant Function and a Theoretical Context for Its Use in Estimating the Votes of Judges,” in Grossman, J. and Tanenhaus, J. (eds.), Frontiers of Judicial Research. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
WALKER, Thomas G. (1972) “A Note Concerning Partisan Influences on Trial-Judge Decision Making,” 6 Law & Society Review 645.Google Scholar