庭审改革后法庭布局重构之设想

关于如何实现庭审改革后所要达到的诉讼理念 ,我国公检法三家都从改变诉讼观念、提高业务素质去思考 ,而这是不全面的 ,还应从构置合理的法庭布局的角度去理解。构置合理的法庭布局与改变诉讼观念、提高素质是两个同等重要的概念 ,对法庭布局作合理的重构 ,应能起到积极的作用。在此基础上 ,提出重构设想。     

In the laboratory of the states: the progress of Glucksberg's invitation to states to address end-of-life choice

It has now been ten years since the Supreme Court handed down Glucksberg and Quill, rulings on laws that forbid "assisted suicide." In that time, normative and legal developments in the fields of law, medicine, and psychology have changed the landscape of the discourse on the choice of a mentally competent, terminally ill individual to choose to self-administer medications to bring about a peaceful death. Although the Court rejected petitioners' claims that state laws denying them the ability to end their terminal illnesses through self-administered medication violated the Constitution, it left states with the opportunity to experiment with legislation that would allow terminally ill individuals the choices they had previously sought through litigation. Oregon's experience with its Death with Dignity Act, which grants terminally ill, mentally competent individuals the choice to end their lives through self-administered medication, has proven that such laws provide comfort not only to those who, faced with the prospect of a horrible death from a terminal illness, choose to end their lives in a peaceful and dignified manner, but also to those to ultimately choose not to. Additionally, Oregon's experience shows that the fears that originally attended the "assisted suicide" debate are unfounded so long as proper procedures are in place. Because Oregon's Death with Dignity Act has proven both useful and harmless, this Article concludes that it is time for other states to follow Oregon's lead and enact their own legislation to allow their citizens an alternative to what otherwise could be a prolonged and painful death from terminal illness.     

Behind the Mask of Method: Political Orientation and Constitutional Interpretive Preferences

Debate about how to best interpret the Constitution often revolves around interpretive methodologies (e.g., originalism or expansive interpretation). This article examines whether individuals’ political orientation influences the methodologies they prefer to use to interpret the Constitution. We study this proposed relationship using a survey of federal law clerks and an experimental study with college students. The survey results indicate that, compared to conservatives, liberal clerks prefer the current meaning or the most plausible appealing meaning of the constitutional text, while conservatives prefer the original meaning of the text. Liberal clerks also prefer to interpret the Constitution much more expansively. The second study manipulates the policy implications of expansive interpretation and finds this manipulation differentially affects liberals’ and conservatives’ expansiveness preferences.

PACT: A Collaborative Team Model for Treating High Conflict Families in Family Court

This article describes a court‐community model program for high conflict divorced families that is designed to reduce the level of inter‐parental conflict including: a) child exposure to inter‐parental conflict; and b) the frequency of re‐litigation over residential arrangements and parenting plans. The six‐session (16‐hour) program combines conflict resolution and group/community support. The program provides a “Personal Support Team” and “Personal Plan of Action” to help each parent control emotions and maintain agreement. The results of research conducted to explore the effect of the program on level of triangulation and inter‐parental conflict, as well as the frequency of re‐litigation over parenting plans, residential arrangements, and parenting time are reported.     

Rural Policy Assumptions and Policy Failure: The Case of the Re-establishment Grant

For 30 years successive Commonwealth governments have offered grants to encourage marginal farmers to quit farming. The grants have increased in generosity over time but there has only ever been a limited uptake of the program. This paper considers the assumptions policy-makers have made about farmers' behaviour in formulating these programs and compares these with sociological evidence about farmers' incentive structures. This case study provides an example of how the failure to take account of a sufficiently broad range of values when formulating policy can undermine policy objectives from the outset.     

Framing blame: toward a better understanding of the effects of populist communication on populist party preferences

Although previous research has argued that the media play a crucial role in populism’s success, we know too little about how populist messages affect preferences for populist parties. To advance this knowledge, we conducted an experiment in which the core of populist rhetoric – constructing the people as innocent in-group opposed to the establishment as culprit out-group – was manipulated in news articles. The findings indicate that when political elites are blamed for a salient national problem, people are more likely to vote for a populist party and less likely to vote for the largest party in government. Populist vote intentions are indirectly affected via blame perceptions. These findings offer important insights into the media’s role in the electoral success of populism.     

Priming Issues,Party Visibility,and Party Evaluations: The Impact on Vote Switching

Voter volatility has become a hallmark of Western democracies in the past three decades. At the same time short-term factors—such as the media’s coverage of issues, parties, and candidates during an election campaign—have become more important for voters’ decisions. While previous research did look at how campaign news in general affects electoral volatility in general, it has omitted to explicitly test the mechanisms underlying these effects. Building on theories of agenda setting, (affective) priming, and issue ownership, the current study aims to explain why certain news aspects lead voters to switch their vote choice. We theorize it is the visibility of a party, the evaluation of a party, and the attention for issues owned by a party that primes voters to switch to a certain party. We use national panel survey data (N = 765) and link this to an extensive content analysis of campaign news on television and in newspapers in the run up to the 2012 Dutch national elections. The results show that issue news leads to vote change in the direction of the party that owns the issue. Even stronger is the effect of party visibility on vote switching. Our results, however, find the strongest support for the effect of party evaluations on vote change: More favorable news about a party increases switching to that party.