U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making, Case Salience, and the Attitudinal Model

Does case salience condition the role of ideological preferences in the decisions of U.S. Supreme Court justices? Does the attitudinal model of judicial behavior hold equally true in high salience and low salience cases? In this article, we analyze the role of case salience as a moderating influence on the explanatory capacity of the attitudinal model and test the strength of the model in high salience versus low salience contexts. Using civil rights votes during forty‐seven Supreme Court terms, from 1953 through 2000, we find that the attitudinal model is sensitive to case salience and that justices rely significantly more on ideological preferences when deciding high salience cases than low salience ones. Our findings represent an important qualification to the attitudinal model.     

Formal and informal control views in China,Japan, and the U.S.

Purpose

This study compared and contrasted the views of formal and informal crime control among college students from China, Japan, and the U.S., and examined the correlates behind the views.

Methods

Using the same questionnaire, this study collected data from 1,275 completed surveys in the three nations.

Results

The study revealed that both Chinese and Japanese respondents evaluated formal and informal control and their combination in crime control as more important than American counterparts did. The variable trust in police was a predictor of attitudes toward formal control and the mix of formal and informal control in all the three nations. Demographics in the U.S. were more important factors than in China and Japan in predicting the respondents' ranking of the importance of formal control and informal control and their combination in crime control.

Conclusions

This is the first empirically comparative study of the perceived importance of formal and informal mechanisms in crime prevention and control in China, Japan and the U.S. The study found both similarities and differences in the perceived importance and reasons behind them. More research is needed in the future.     

Death penalty views in China, Japan and the U.S.: An empirical comparison

Many nations impose the death penalty, yet most of the literature on capital punishment has focused on Western nations, particularly the U.S. China and Japan are two retentionist nations. Based on the data collected in 2005, this study examined the level of death penalty support and views on capital punishment among college students from China, Japan, and the U.S. It was found that Chinese respondents reported the highest level of death penalty support, followed by Japanese and U.S. students. Respondents from China and Japan were more likely to believe in the deterrence value of capital punishment than their U.S. counterparts. Views on retribution differed among the respondents. U.S. students were most likely to feel that innocent people are sentenced to death. In multivariate analyses, deterrence was the strongest correlate of death penalty views among Chinese and Japanese respondents, followed closely by retribution. For both Chinese and Japanese students, the barbarity of government taking the life of a person was the strongest predictor for opposing the death penalty. For U.S. respondents, retribution was the strongest reason for supporting capital punishment and the barbarity of executions was the strongest reason for opposing the death penalty.     

Lawyers,Justices, and Issue Salience: When and How Do Legal Arguments Affect the U.S. Supreme Court?

A good deal of scholarly evidence suggests that the decisionmaking of the U.S. Supreme Court is affected by legal argument. At the same time, it seems clear that in a great many cases the justices have enduring, strongly held views. In such cases, they should be impervious to the effects of advocacy. When are the justices apt to be influenced by the Court's legal community, and when will lawyers be less relevant? The answer, we think, has to do with the salience of the issue before the Court. We suspect that in nonsalient cases the justices have less‐intense preferences and therefore are open to the persuasion of lawyers. In salient cases, by contrast, the content of legal policy matters much more to the justices. As a result, they are less amenable to legal argument and adhere more strictly to their personal policy preferences. Our empirical tests support this orientation.     

土地征收公共目的的美法日三国比较研究

选取具有代表性的美法日三国,从土地征收公共目的的立法界定、具体认定和法律救济三个角度进行比较分析,可以发现显著差异与共同经验并存。借鉴其共同经验,我国可借修订《土地管理法》之机回归土地征收目的一元化,并在此基础上明确界定土地征收公共目的的范围,增设公共目的认定程序,引入公共目的异议司法救济制度。     

Information flow from Japan to U.S. researchers in applied and basic energy research fields

A recent study conducted by Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) evaluated technical information transfer from Japan to the United States. This evaluation was part of a larger assessment of international monitoring of energy technology development conducted for the U.S. Department of Energy. For this study, U.S. researchers in each of ten selected technical fields were identified and interviewed to obtain their perceptions of information transfer from Japan. Results from these interviews indicated that, although there are major differences among the technical fields, U.S. researchers generally consider information transfer from Japan to the U.S. to be inadequate. Researchers particularly noted the difficulties they have attending conferences in Japan or visiting Japanese research facilities. In contrast, Japanese researchers attend all major conferences and frequently visit laboratories in the U.S. Researchers recommended several steps to improve technology transfer from Japan, including improving the screening and translation of technical material published in Japan, promoting binational seminars and workshops, and encouraging laboratory visits and exchanges of research personnel.     

美国、日本农业技术推广体系立法的经验与借鉴

美国、日本有关立法对捉业技术推广组织、人员和保障措施的规定十分明确,为其本国农业推广体系功能的发挥提供了有效保障。反观我国相关立法,则显得不足。为加快新杈村建设进度,发展现代农业,破解“三农”问题,应当借鉴美国、日本的立法经验,完善我国农业技术推广体系立法。     

System Justification, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of Fairness and Typicality at Work: A Cross-System Comparison Involving the U.S. and Hungary

This research addresses system justification tendencies in the United States and Hungary and their potential to shape reactions to equity–equality tradeoffs in the workplace. Participants in both nations were asked to rate the fairness of, their satisfaction with, and the typicality of four hypothetical work situations. These scenarios differed in terms of which distributive justice principle was violated (equity or equality) and whether the violation favored the participant or the co-worker (self or other). While the mean level of system justification was lower in Hungary than in the U.S., multilevel models revealed that in both societal contexts the motivation to justify the system was associated with participants’ perceptions of justice in the workplace. Based on the characteristics of the two social systems, however, these tendencies played out differently. Specifically, for the U.S. participants system justification was associated with more favorable views of work situations that emphasized equity over equality and that rewarded the self over others, whereas for Hungarian participants system justification was associated with more favorable views of work situations that emphasized equality over equity and that rewarded others over the self. Results also revealed that Americans (but not Hungarians) who scored higher on system justification perceived as fairer that which they perceived as more typical of their society. Taken as a whole, the evidence suggests that the psychological transfer of legitimacy from socialism to capitalism in Hungary remains incomplete.     

Innovation in the U.S. Service Sector

This paper contributes to ard a better understanding of innovation in the service sector by focusing on the disparate nature of R&D in the U.S. service sector as learned through case studies of the U.S. telecommunications, financial services, systems integration services, and research and development testing services industries. Based on this understanding of the nature and scope of R&D therein, a new policy-oriented model of innovation specific to the service sector is posited. Also, policy recommendations are offered with regard to the public sector’s collection and interpretation of R&D data related to the service sector.      

气候变化语境下的美国环境诉讼——以马塞诸塞州诉美国联邦环保局案为例

气候变化诉讼是美国环境法的新领域,马塞诸塞州诉美国联邦环保局案是气候变化诉讼的经典判决.该案核心争议在于原告是否享有起诉资格以及美国联邦环保局对新机动车辆的温室气体排放是否有权进行立法规制等.该案对美国的政治、经济、法律等领域产生了深远、广泛的影响.判决所确立的原告起诉资格规则大大松动了传统的规则;该案实质是不同利益诉求的州及相关利益团体的能源、经济等利益的博弈;对于美国以化石燃料为根基的煤炭、汽车、电力等行业以及美国未来能源经济影响深远;反映了美国气候变化政策与法律机制之复杂现实状况.     

应对竞争的抗辩:美国和欧共体反价格歧视法的比较与借鉴

价格歧视属于企业价格决策的一种,而价格决策很大程度上受制于企业所处的竞争地位和竞争环境.而价格歧视又是竞争法规范的对象.为了将与竞争法目标相容的和不相容的价格歧视区别出来,除了其他规则之外,美国和欧共体的竞争法还确立了应对竞争的抗辩,被控方可据此推翻指控.比较美国和欧共体竞争法中的有关规则,分析两者在这一问题上的相同点和不同之处,针对我国未来反垄断立法中的禁止价格歧视条款,提出具体的建议.     

论社区矫正与其他非拘禁措施——问题与解决思路

社区矫正制度与非拘禁措施在欧洲有逾30年历史,比较成熟。各国分在审前阶段,审前阶段和刑罚执行阶段规定了不同的非拘禁措施。非拘禁措施的执行必须建立在信赖的基础之上,而且要有法律规定做保障。     

Television and the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Elections

We use the structure of media markets within states and across state boundaries to study the relationship between television and electoral competition. In particular, we compare incumbent vote margins in media markets where content originates in the same state as media consumers versus vote margins where content originates out of state. This contrast provides a clear test of whether or not television coverage correlates with the incumbency advantage. We study U.S. Senate and state gubernatorial races from the 1950s through the 1990s and find that the effect of TV is small, directionally indeterminate, and statistically insignificant.     

Position Taking and Cosponsorship in the U.S. House

Bill cosponsorship has become an important part of the legislative and electoral process in the modern House of Representatives. Using interviews with congressional members and staff, I explain the role of cosponsorship as a signal to agenda setters and a form of position taking for constituents. Regression analysis confirms that cosponsoring varies with a member's electoral circumstances, institutional position, and state size, but generally members have adapted slowly to the introduction of cosponsorship to the rules and practice of the House.     

Measuring U.S. innovative activity: business data at the U.S. Census Bureau

Innovation is seen as a source of strength and vitality in the U.S. economy. Better measures of innovative activity—including but not limited to innovation alone—could improve what we know about the sources of productivity and economic growth. The U.S. Census Bureau collects data on some measures of innovative activity that research shows affect economic performance. But understanding how the effects work requires more than just measures of innovative activity. It also requires solid statistical information about core measures of the economy so we can rule out the possibility that a measure of innovative activity merely proxies for something omitted from or measured poorly in the core data. Gaps in core measures can be filled by better integrating existing data and by more structured collections of new data. Versions of this paper were presented at the NSF/SRS Workshop, Advancing Measures of Innovation: Knowledge Flows, Business Metrics, and Measurement Strategies, Arlington VA, June 6–7, 2006, and circulated to the Advisory Committee on Measuring Innovation in the 21st Century Economy, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. This paper is unofficial and thus has not undergone the review accorded to official Census Bureau publications. Lucia Foster, Ron Jarmin, Jeffrey Mayer, Thomas Mesenbourg, and Daniel Weinberg, and the editors made valuable comments. However, the views expressed in the paper are those of the author and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau.     

美国《拜杜法案》的重思与变革

1980年12月12日通过的美国<拜杜法案>是美国专利法制度的重要组成部分. 回顾该法案的制定动因和基本内容,梳理法案给美国大学带来的深远影响以及遭遇的批评和质疑,可以认为大学不是"专利怪客".克服<拜杜法案>的局限和"失灵"在于大学和其他利益方主体的利益平衡,美国<2009年专利法修改案>对于在成熟的知识经济时代的<拜杜法案>如何变革进行了回应.     

对"牛吃麦"案例的另一维度的解释——英、美土地制度和财产制度的变迁

科斯定理是从经济效益的角度来分配权利的,它的"拍卖式"法律价值取向贯穿于美国土地制度与财产制度的发展历程.在与科斯定理相关的"牛吃麦"案例上,美国初始选择了"圈出"规则,后又转向"圈入"规则,其规则的变动始终遵循着"经济效益最大化"原则;而英国自始至终选择了"圈入"规则,早期是为了维护公共财产利益,之后是为了维护私有财产利益,在这过程中,"权利保护原则"是其不变的宗旨.科斯定理纯粹从经济效益的角度来解释有着相同法治渊源与传统的英、美两国在"牛吃麦"案例上所适用规则的差异性,欠缺历史维度的法律分析.