State Courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Protection of Civil Liberties

Advocates of federalism, both in the United States and elsewhere, often cite the potential for enhanced protection of individual civil liberties as an emerging rationale for a federal system dividing governmental responsibilities between central and regional governments and central and regional judiciaries. Echoing this, some judicial officials and scholars, confronting an increasingly conservative U.S. Supreme Court, have called for state supreme courts to use the state constitutional grounds to preserve and increase the protections of the Bill of Rights. Using event count analysis, we examine state search-and-seizure cases for 1981 to 1993 to ascertain under what circumstances state courts would use this opportunity to eliminate Supreme Court review. We find that the relative ideological position of the state supreme courts and the U.S. Supreme Court often prevents, or does away with the need for, liberal courts to use the adequate and independent state grounds doctrine to expand the rights of criminal defendants and that state supreme court justices react more predictably in the assertion of constitutional protection law than the general consensus suggests.     

Meeting our friend, the genome.

(1) Encounter with the genome. (2) Difficulties in the path. (3) Legal and ethical implications. (4) Patenting genes. (5) The genome and evolution. (6) An adjunct to medicine or a new world? (7) Forbidden territory or the next step for humanity? (8) Informed decisions.     

Ethical,legal, social,and policy issues in the use of genomic technology by the U.S. Military

Advances in genomic science are attracting the interest of the U.S. military for their potential to improve medical care for members of the military and to aid in military recruitment, training, specialization, and mission accomplishment. While researchers have explored the ethical, legal, and social issues raised by the use of genomic science in a wide variety of contexts, there has been virtually no examination of these issues in connection with the use of genomics by the military. This article identifies potential uses of genomic science by the military, proposes an applicable ethical and legal framework, and applies the framework to provide ethical and legal guidance for military decision-makers.     

Birth Order,Preferences, and Norms on the U.S. Supreme Court

The members of the U.S. Supreme Court have different ideas about what constitutes good judicial policy as well as how best to achieve that policy. From where do these ideas originate? Evolutionary psychology suggests that an answer may lie in early life experiences in which siblings assume roles that affect an adult's likely acceptance of changes in the established order. According to this view, older siblings take on responsibilities that make them more conservative and rule‐bound, while younger ones adopt roles that promote liberalism and greater rebelliousness. Applying this theory to the Court, I show that these childhood roles manifest themselves in later life in the decisions of the justices. Birth order explains not only the justices’ policy preferences but also their acceptance of one important norm of judicial decisionmaking, specifically their willingness to exercise judicial review.