SOCIAL JUSTICE AND FAMILY COURT REFORM

Creating a unified family court, or any type of family court reform, may have only a minimal impact if it simply changes the structure of how judges do business rather than addresses the structure of the child welfare system itself. The authors argue that family court reform must place social justice at its center. First, they discuss profound flaws in the child welfare system that make poor and minority families especially vulnerable to coercive state intervention. Second, they describe two approaches to child welfare cases–family systems theory and therapeutic justice–that can help to guide reform efforts directed at addressing these structural flaws. Finally, they suggest ways in which family law scholarship can assist in creating a social justice agenda for family court reform.     

Appointee Confirmation and Tenure: The Succession of U.S. Federal Agency Appointees, 1989–2009

This article analyzes the confirmation and tenure of 2,300 Senate‐confirmed, presidential appointees to U.S. government agencies between 1989 and 2009, linking patterns of appointee confirmation and tenure to institutional politics, appointee independence, and agency context. Consistent with prior research, the authors find that nominees of new, powerful, and popular presidents enjoy expedited Senate confirmation. Contentious congressional committee oversight, by contrast, tends to delay confirmation and reduce tenure. Agency heads and positions insulated from removal, such as for fixed‐term positions and inspectors general, increase tenure. Extending empirical research, the analysis highlights program‐ and agency‐level variations that speak to the many contingencies shaping appointee politics. Appointee positions associated with national security and broad statutory discretion receive expedited confirmation. Agencies with more professionals are associated with increased tenure, whereas agencies with more appointees among managers see shorter tenures. The results speak to scholarship on appointee politics and to public knowledge about the role of appointments in American government.     

The impact of family indifference on delinquency among American Indian youth: A test of general strain theory

Native American (NA) youth's delinquency is one of the major problems that have been overlooked by criminal justice researchers and practitioners. To examine if negative family environment influences their delinquency with the mediating effect of negative emotion, this study analyzed structural equation modeling based on the General Strain Theory (GST). Using data regarding NA adolescents, this study found much evidence supporting GST. The results of the model with anger showed that anger was a mediating variable between family indifferences and delinquency, and the model with depression indicated that family indifferences increased delinquency through depression. However, some results in the model with anger and depression were not in accordance with GST hypothesis.