Der Europ?ische Gerichtshof als Motor der Integration: Eine akteursbezogene Erkl?rung

For nearly five decades, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has developed a decisively pro-European case law and has become the ??engine of integration??. Institutional explanations shed light on the Court??s room for manoevre. They have to be complemented by actor-centered explanations that shed light on the judges?? motives of action. The explanation offered by the following paper is unfolded in two steps. In the first one, the article describes idiosyncrasies of the European law discourse that already shaped the judges before they were appointed. The analysis of the idiosyncrasies corresponds to a scepticism towards the idea of national sovereignty, a belief in the necessity of creative and idealist, law-augmenting judges and a dominance of output-oriented legitimization strategies. In a second step, the article shows that in the sociological sense the ECJ judges constitute a group. While the individual judges share an understanding of the aims and functions of European law, the group develops its own identity and grants status to those who perform successful actions with respect to the common integration agenda. This explanation is more realistic than ??rational choice?? explanations which point to the direct and personal benefits that judges derive from their pro-European case law.     

Identity and dating commitment among women and men in college

Lower division and upper division college women's and men's commitment in a dating relationship was examined in connection with their (a) gender role attitudes, (b) educational aspirations, (c) certainty about their future vocation, and (d) the importance they attach to work vs. marriage as a source of life satisfaction. Dating commitment was also examined for women in relation to their dedication to work for pay after marriage, and for men in terms of their ideas about their future wife working. The more certain upper division college women's vocational identity, the more committed they were to their dating partner, but the more they planned to work after marriage the less involved they were in a relationship. Additionally, upper division women who placed more importance on a job than marriage and who had a clearer vocational identity were less involved in a relationship. The clearer upper division men's vocational identity, the more committed they were in a relationship. Lower division men who placed more importance on work compared to marriage were less involved in a dating relationship. The results are discussed in light of Erikson's stages of identity development and more recent research that suggests women's identity development follows a different course from men's.Received Ph.D. in child development and family relationships at the University of Texas at Austin. Current research interests include the influence of parent-child interaction on children's mastery and achievement motivation, peer and intimate relationships, and identity development.Received Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Albany. Research focuses on the development of relationships from courtship into marriage and first-time parenthood.Received Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota. Program of research concerns the developmental origins, correlates, and consequences of identity formation in adolescence. Recent research addresses the dynamics of relationships in adoptive families and the consequences of openness in adoption on family members.Received B.A. in child development and family relationships program at the University of Texas at Austin.     

What does “knock and announce” mean? An analysis of<Emphasis Type="Italic">Wilson v. Arkansas</Emphasis> and its progeny

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Wilson v. Arkansas (1994) that the common law “knock-and-announce” principle formed part of the “reasonableness” inquiry under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Court’s opinion gave little guidance as to what would be unreasonable under these circumstances. Some critics expressed concern that this lack of guidance would lead to many variations among lower courts. Other observers discerned a signal that little should be deemed “unreasonable” in the context of “knock and announce.” These criticisms are analyzed through a review of lower court interpretations of Wilson.     

Perceived fairness of drug-testing policies: An application of Leventhal’s principles of procedural justice

Employees rate the fairness of organizational policies by applying principles of distributive and procedural justice. Using Leventhal’s (1980) Principles of Procedural Justice, the current study surveyed 279 upper-level college and graduate students to determine the impact each principle has on support for drugtesting policies. The results support the hypothesis that drug-testing programs that violate these principles are viewed as unfair.     

Author Index volume 35 (2002)

Authors Index

Author Index volume 35 (2002)