Appellate Court Supervision in the Federal Judiciary: A Hierarchical Perspective

In this article, we examine factors that influence appellate supervision in the lower tiers of the federal judicial hierarchy. Drawing on the insights of agency theory, we develop a framework to assess the determinants of circuit panel decisions to affirm or reverse federal district court rulings. Our analysis of U.S. Courts of Appeals' published civil rights decisions over a 29-year period (1971–1999) offers support for several hypothesized relationships. As expected, the outcome of appellate review varied with the level of agreement between the preferences of the circuit (as principal) and the policy position of the trial court (as agent). In addition, we found that circuits were more likely to affirm trial court decisions that were contrary to the preferences of the federal district court judge, suggesting that circuit judges may rely on ideological signals when evaluating appeals before them. We also hypothesized that the monitoring activities of circuits would be influenced by individual circuits' relationship with their principal, the Supreme Court. Consistent with these expectations, panels were more likely to reverse district court rulings that were incongruous with the policy predisposition of the High Court. In addition, as Supreme Court scrutiny of a circuit increased, the likelihood of a circuit panel subsequently reversing a district court also increased. Although further inquiry is necessary to clarify the interpretation of this result, the finding does suggest that district courts are more likely to engage in decision making that deviates from circuit preferences when that circuit faces more intense supervision from the Supreme Court.     

Gender Differences in Felony Court Processing:

Interactive analyses examined three related hypotheses of disparity. The typicality hypothesis proposes that women are treated with chivalry in criminal processing, but only when their charges are consistent with stereotypes of female offenders. Selective chivalry predicts that decision makers extend chivalry disproportionately to white females. Differential discretion suggests that disparity is most likely in informal decisions such as charge reduction rather than in formal decisions at final sentencing. Data for the analysis derived from 9,966 felony theft cases and 18,176 felony assault cases disposed in California in 1988. Gender disparity was evident in findings that females with no prior record were more likely than similar males to receive charge reductions, and this enhanced females' chances for probation. The only indication of selective chivalry was a greater tendency to change charges of assault to nonassault among white female defendants than among minority females. Pivotal decisions concerning charge reduction provided partial support for the notion of differential discretion. The findings provided no clear support for the typicality thesis.     

人民法院司法公信现状的实证研究

当前,对我国司法公信现状的判断主要是通过满意度调查的方式获得的,但这种方式具有片面性。本文通过对案件质效、法官自我的评价、当事人的反映和社会公众的认知等多角度的考察,揭示出我国的司法公信呈现出"四个交织"的复杂图景:案件质效不断趋好与司法公信不断趋弱的现象交织,当事人维权意识增强与权利滥用现象交织,社会公众对司法的客观评价与主观臆断交织,司法公信不足与司法自信不强交织。     

司法审级中的信息、组织与治理——从中国传统司法的“上控”与“审转”切入

尽管从表面上看,中国传统司法审级中的上控与审转违反了上诉审的经济学原理,但本文的分析表明,这两种制度的出现实际上来源于古典司法复审的政治治理功能,并且在事实上构成了一种有效率的信息机制与组织替代,回应了古代社会低成本地获取地方治理信息的难题。但这些理论上合理的制度在实际的运行中也产生了许多问题,并且一直存在于当下中国的审级制度之中,其根本的解决进路只能是在国家能力建设基础上超越科层化的制度分工与审级分工。     

司法独立:为什么

本文试图在理论上系统回答司法独立的理论渊源。认为司法独立是由三方面原因所引起的:一是司法对社会起作用的方式;二是司法在现代宪政秩序的结构性关系中所扮演的角色;三是司法的根本价值即保护人的基本权利。在根本上,司法独立还是现代国家发展起来的司法中立性和自主性的必然要求。     

法院“人财物”问题研究——以法院审判权的独立行使为视角

我国之所以出现法院对地方政府的依赖以及地方政府对法院审判权的不当干预现象,根本原因在于目前法院的"人财物"管理方式存在制度性缺陷,即法院行政化的人事制度、依赖政府财政拨款的经费保障制度与现代审判权的运行规律存有内在冲突。它"后台"式地消解着法院的独立性,必须建立以符合法官职业特性和审判权运行规律的"人财物"管理制度,这是审判权独立运行的基石。     

Judging the Other: The Intersection of Race,Gender, and Class in Family Court

This critical ethnographic study of family court child maltreatment proceedings describes and illuminates the ways in which racial, gender, and class disadvantages can manifest on the ground as judges, attorneys, social service workers, and parents—joined often by gender but split by race and class—adjudicate cases. The findings suggest that intersectionality worked in ways that exponentially marginalized poor mothers of color in the courtroom. They were marginalized both through the rules of the adversarial process (which silenced their voices) and through the construction of narratives (which emphasized individual weakness) over structural obstacles as well as personal irresponsibility over expressions of maternal care and concern. Standard due process courtroom practices also communicated bias or social exclusion, especially in a courtroom split by race and class.     

Race and Gender Recidivism Differences Among Juvenile Mental Health Court Graduates

Grounded in the theory of therapeutic jurisprudence, this research explores whether recidivism differs by race, ethnicity, or gender among juvenile mental health court graduates (N = 63). Mean number of pre‐program offenses were compared to the mean number of offenses committed by program completion. Results showed statistically significant reductions in recidivism by both males (p < .001) and females (p < .003). Racial and ethnic minorities demonstrated larger reductions when compared to Whites (p < .001 for Hispanics and p < .01 for combined ethnicities). These results contribute to the literature on effective intervention models for diverse juvenile offender populations.     

Abandoning the common law: medical negligence, genetic tests and wrongful life in the Australian High Court

The Australian High Court recently found that the common law could allow parents to claim tortious damages when medical negligence was proven to have led to the birth of an unplanned, but healthy, baby (Cattanach v Melchior (2003) 215 CLR 1). In Harriton v Stephens (2006) 80 ALJR 791; [2006] HCA 15 and Waller v James; Waller v Hoolahan (2006) 80 ALJR 846; [2006] HCA 16 the High Court in a six-to-one decision (Kirby J dissenting) decided that no such claim could be made by a child when medical negligence in failing to order an in utero genetic test caused the child severe disability. In an era when almost all pregnancies will soon require patented fetal genetic tests as part of the professional standard of care, the High Court, by barring so-called "wrongful life" (better termed "wrongful suffering") claims, may have created a partial immunity from suit for their corporate manufacturers and the doctors who administer them. What lessons can be learnt from this case about how the Australian High Court is, or should be, approaching medical negligence cases and its role as guardian of the Australian common law?     

论澳高等法院对制宪会议辩论记录的运用

澳大利亚高等法院在解释宪法中,从拒绝使用制宪会议辩论记录到承认运用这些记录。法院运用这些记录的目的和效果主要是对宪法权利的保护加以限制。这种做法受到了激烈的批评:制宪者的观点是过去的看法不应该对当今法院具有限制作用;澳大利亚主权在于人民,而不在于过去的制宪者;制宪者对人权的态度与当代澳大利亚人和现代共同体的核心价值观和信念严重相悖。     

Attitudes toward Wife Abuse of Police Officers and Judiciary Members in Turkey: Profession,Gender, Ambivalent Sexism and Sex Roles

This study examined the attitudes of police officers and judiciary members toward wife abuse in Turkey and the relation between these attitudes and profession, ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism), gender, and gender roles. The following instruments were used for the analyses: The Attitudes Toward Wife Abuse Scale (AWAS), the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), and the Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were 300 police officers and 150 judiciary members selected from different regions of Turkey. Results showed that compared to judiciary members, police officers are more tolerant of physical and verbal abuse of women in marriage, but less tolerant of the idea of the victim leaving an abusive marriage partner. Similarly, men were more tolerant than women of those husbands who physically and verbally abuse their wives, but less supportive of the wife leaving the abusive partner. Profession and ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism) were found to be the strongest predictors of attitudes toward wife abuse.     

Australian Federal Court cooks up a storm over design rights

An equitable owner of copyright in design drawings is entitlednot only to an assignment of the legal interest in the copyrightbut also to relief to prevent a manufacturer representing thatit was authorized to make goods in accordance with those drawings.     

The Effect of Gender in the Perception of Elder Physical Abuse in Court

Two experiments investigated mock jurors' perceptions of elder abuse (EA) in a physical assault case. In Experiment 1, participants read a fictional criminal trial summary of a physical assault case in which the alleged victim was 66, 76, or 86 years old. In Experiment 2, the age of the alleged victim was 76 years old, but the gender of the alleged victim and the gender of the defendant were crossed. The results of the experiments showed that women believed the alleged victim more and rendered a guilty verdict more often than men. Overall, the alleged victim was believed more than the defendant regardless of the age of the alleged victim, and most verdicts were guilty. These results are discussed in terms of the factors that affect perceptions of alleged victims of EA in court.     

Understanding the Judicial Role in Addressing Gender Bias: A View from the Eighth Circuit Federal Court System

The role of trial judges in the litigation process is frequently debated. Are judges to be dispassionate adjudicators, disengaged referees in a sport in which attorneys compete? Or are they charged with a more active role in promoting the substance, form, and process of justice? In the present paper, we explore the judicial role in addressing gender bias in federal litigation, using data gathered for the Eighth Circuit Gender Fairness Task Force. The federal judges of this circuit were surveyed about their experiences, observations, and opinions of gender-biased conduct. Results indicated that although judges viewed judicial intervention as an appropriate response to gender bias, they had little personal experience with intervention in such a situation. Fur thermore, when specific hypothetical scenarios were presented, they generally agreed that the described conduct was inappropriate but offered little consensus regarding the best course of action for an attorney or judge confronted with such behavior. The Eighth Circuit data thus provide the basis for expanded understanding of the conduct at issue, the options for action in response, and the persistent discrepancy in viewpoints on gender bias and the judicial role.     

Diversity in the Judiciary: The Case For Positive Action

A range of policies has been developed in England and Wales to reform the judicial appointments process so as to promote greater diversity. But despite two decades of official activity, the pace of change has been far slower than anticipated. Increasing awareness of the intransigence of the problem has led to a greater willingness to revisit some of the more fundamental tenets which have underpinned the approach to the problem to date, in particular, the unquestioning and inflexible commitment to the principle of equal treatment. This article examines the different forms of positive action which might play a part in the development of new diversity strategies for the judiciary. It reviews the arguments for and against different types, in terms of effectiveness, quality of appointments, and equity. It goes on to consider the legal frameworks which govern diversity and equality policies and assesses the legal implications of adopting different forms of positive action.