THE ROLE CONCEPT IN JUDICIAL RESEARCH

This article addresses the state of research which uses role concepts to explain the process of making decisions in legal institutions. After identifying several important limitations of previous research, a new scale—measuring normative orientations toward discretion—is proposed. The results of administering this scale to samples of Iowa and California judges suggest that the measure is fairly reliable, and an argument is made in favor of its validity. The article concludes with some observations on the importance of measurement in research on the legal process.     

行政自由裁量权概念的迷思与匡正

行政自由裁量权概念的发达除客观需要之外,还有人为的因素,为行政扩张服务甚至为了逃避司法审查。然而,行政自由裁量权是一个可以被内化或转化甚至淹没的概念,虽然它是事先确定的一个指引但却是一个错误的指引。国家主权理论的衰微,行政权的弱化,行政种类多样,裁量空间的压缩以及部分裁量被“不确定法律概念”涵摄,行政自由裁量权风光不再。让行政自由裁量权概念在行政法领域尽快消失。以行政法的“裁量性规范”,将行政“裁量性事实”放在行政行为下考量,通过对其目的性、公益性以及合法性进行的判断,使其获得正当性基础。行政诉讼以是否应该作为、是否超越职权、是否滥用职权为司法审查内容,以确认判决、撤销判决、确认无效判决为判决方式,取消现行的变更判决。     

THE BEST SEAT IN THE HOUSE: THE COURT ASSIGNMENT AND JUDICIAL SATISFACTION

A survey of 355 judges examined the differences in judicial satisfaction between those assigned to problem-solving courts—such as drug treatment and unified family—and judges in other more traditional assignments such as family law and criminal courts. The unified family court systems, like drug treatment courts, have generally adopted the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. Significant differences were found on each of the three survey scales: (1) helpfulness, (2) attitude toward litigants, and (3) positive effects of assignment. The judges who were in the problem-solving courts (drug treatment and unified family court) scored higher on all three scales than those who were not (traditional family and criminal court). The group of problem-solving court judges consistently scored higher than the other group of judges, with the drug treatment court judges scoring the highest. The group of traditional criminal court and family court judges scored less positively, with the criminal court judges having the lowest scores. The problem-solving court judges were more likely to report believing that the role of the court should include helping litigants address the problems that brought them there and were more likely to observe positive changes in the litigants. They were also more likely to believe that litigants are motivated to change and are able to do so. They felt more respected by the litigants and were more likely to think that the litigants were grateful for help they received. The problem-solving court judges were also more likely to report being happy in their assignments and to believe that these assignments have a positive emotional effect on them.     

STREET-LEVEL DISCRETION IN POLICING

This article examines the consequences of a clash between police officers' expectations of street-level discretion and supervisors' constraints on such discretion. Two hypothesized consequences are examined: police officer alienation from the citizenry and police officer disaffection with the department. Both attitudinal data (from a survey of police officers) and behavioral data (from direct observation of police officers on patrol) are used. The data show some support for the hypothesis that disaffection with the department is a consequence of the discretion-constraint clash, but no support of alienation from the citizenry as a consequence. Rather, the data suggest that officers back away from discretion in situations where the public is perceived to be hostile and where supervisors reinforce that perception by active monitoring of police-citizen encounters.     

THE PRESS AND THE JUDICIARY： COURT AND JUDICIAL REPORTS IN THE PREss IN ENGLAND AND WALES

Western scholars have argued that image making and image management are a preoccupation of the judiciary. Images of the judiciary may take a variety of forms and be produced for kinds of audiences. One form of judicial image making and image management is live performances in the courtroom and other court settings. Another is the written judgment where the preoccupation is the style of the written text. Press and other mass media reports of judicial activity are another. The audience for judicial images is equally diverse, from fellow judges, lawyers in the courts and the wider legal community, the litigants before the courts to the executive, legislature and the public both in the courtroom and beyond. The image of the judiciary that is available to the public has a particular significance in Western rule of law democracies. As a general rule courts and the judiciary are required to operate in public and their activities must be open to public scrutiny. A recent policy manifestation of this goal is debated about confidence in the justice system and initiatives designed to improve confidence. In the majority of cases public scrutiny of judicial activity and public confidence in the judiciary relies upon the media. Objective and accurate press and media reports play a key role in shaping public understanding of the judiciary and generating or undermining confidence in that institution. Reports in regional and national newspapers have long been an important source of information, shaping public knowledge and facilitating public scrutiny of the justice system. In the UK, there is almost no scholarship on these representations past or present. The result is little known about the representation of the courts and the judiciary in press reports. Little is known about what the diligent reader of these reports can learn about judicial activity. The aim of this article is to take a first step towards changing that state of affairs. It uses a data set made up of 205 contemporary domestic newspaper reports of court and judi     

BARRIERS TO REUNIFICATION FOR INCARCERATED PARENTS—A JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVE

Within the child welfare system, going to jail does not automatically mean losing your children. As the number of incarcerated parents rises, California dependency bench officers are looking at the effects incarceration has on parents seeking to reunify with their children. The California legislature passed legislation allowing a dependency judicial officer to consider the effect incarceration has on parents' performance and to grant additional reunification if a parent's progress is hindered by incarceration. In Los Angeles County, the Incarcerated Parents Working Group was specifically created in 2009 to look at the services available to incarcerated parents and what barriers these parents face in their efforts to reunify. Additionally, the working group has created judicial training on this subject for their bench officers and for other judicial officers throughout the state.     

THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Since Chief Justice Taft's highly activist tenure, many people have looked to the Supreme Court for leadership in efforts to modernize federal judicial administration. This article reviews the role of the Chief Justice of the United States in federal judicial administration. as well as organizational and procedural improvements in court management at all three tiers of the federal court system, as seen by one trained in public administration Although improvement is apparent. other needed steps include less emphasis on the number of judgeships and more careful long-range planning and experimentation with new techniques     

JUDICIAL DECISIONS IN FAMILY RELATIONS IN POLAND

At a time of sweeping political, economic, and social changes in Eastern Europe, the family courts in Poland are under threat. This article traces their development and unique approach to family law and outlines the proposals for change in the Polish court system.     

JUDICIAL ROTATION AS CENTRIPETAL FORCE: SENTENCING IN THE COURT COMMUNITIES OF SOUTH CAROLINA*

Courts as communities theory emphasizes the sentencing differences that can arise between localities within a single state. The results of published studies have highlighted how local differences emerge based on informal sociological and political processes defined by the communities perspective. The findings from recent quantitative studies from South Carolina have revealed notably less county variation in sentencing than has been observed elsewhere. I use qualitative interviews with 13 South Carolina trial judges to investigate sentencing processes and to shed light on these findings. The interviews explore the state's legal structure and culture, including the practice of circuit rotation in which judges travel among counties holding court. The results suggest rotation serves as a centripetal force of sentencing culture, homogenizing what might otherwise be a more varied collection of county‐specific norms. Rotation leads to increased uniformity through judge shopping and the cross‐pollination of ideas and norms. Defendants can strategically judge shop and plead in front of a lenient judge—a process that gives rise to the term “plea judge,” which is a label for the most lenient judges who sentence a large number of defendants. Rotation also increases the interactions among judges and prosecutors, expanding networks and grapevines, and leading to cross‐pollination and the sharing of ideas.     

PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION IN FILING CHARGES IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES*

Based on data collected from prosecutors' files on domestic violence cases, the research reported here attempts to isolate variables associated with a decision to issue criminal charges in a case. The analysis reveals that variables reflective of the defendant's current or past choices were most strongly associated with the charging decision. Specifically, the defendant's appearing at the charging conference and his use of drugs or alcohol at the time of the violence were the factors most strongly associated with the decision to issue a criminal charge. Other related factors were also reflective of choices made by the defendant: degree of injury inflicted, the instrument used, the fact of prior offenses, and prior abuse of the particular victim.