Convention effects: examining the impact of national presidential nominating conventions on information,preferences, and behavioral intentions

We ask whether and how US presidential nominating conventions matter in contemporary US elections. Using individual-level panel data, we find evidence that the conventions exert important effects on the electorate by influencing post-convention intentions to participate in electoral politics, knowledge about the candidates, and candidate favorability ratings, even after controlling for pre-convention intentions, knowledge, and candidate ratings. We conclude that conventions remain important campaign events that play a role in facilitating democratic processes in America.     

Poetic Justice: An Interpretation of Lawyers’ Reactions to Verse Judgments

This article offers an interpretation of lawyers’ reactions to verse judgments, being judicial decisions rendered in rhymed poetry form. While, in recent history, there has been an unexplained break in the close historical connection between poetry and law, some judges nevertheless continue to render their judicial decisions in verse. This has met strong criticism from fellow judges, inevitably, but also from lawyers. However, there is no evidence in academic writing of anyone attempting to explain why lawyers are having these reactions. Endeavouring to fill that void, this research employs hermeneutics to offer an interpretation of lawyers’ reactions to verse judgments. The article analyses the varied opinions uncovered in five qualitative interviews with lawyers of different backgrounds, and contends that a movement of poetry back towards its utilitarian origins would see lawyers change their reaction to verse judgments, instead viewing them as an appropriate form of judicial expression.     

Imperfect adaptation: how the WTO and the IMF adjust to shifting power distributions among their members

How do international institutions adjust to shifting power distributions among their members? We argue that institutional adaptations to the rise of emerging and the decline of established powers are different from what power transition theories (PTTs) would lead us to believe. Institutional adaptations are not impossible, as pessimist PTT variants hold; and they are rarely easy to attain, let alone perfect, as optimist PTT variants imply. To bridge the gap between these versions of PTT, we propose an institutionalist power shift theory (IPST) which combines insights on the conditions and mechanisms of institutional change from functionalist, historical and distributive variants of rational institutionalism. IPST claims that institutional adaptations will succeed or fail depending on whether or not emerging powers are able to undermine the international institution and to make credible threats to this effect. To demonstrate IPST’s plausibility we analyze: (1) how India and Brazil gained the agreement of established powers to their membership in the WTO core negotiation group (“Quad”), which had previously been dominated by developed countries; and (2) how China reached agreement with established powers on (more) even-handed surveillance of IMF members’ financial stability, which, up to then, had focused on developing countries and exchange rate issues.     

The Impact of Unpunished Hate Crimes: When Derogating the Victim Extends into Derogating the Group

Just world research has shown that observers derogate victims more for their misfortunes if the perpetrator is not harshly punished (Lerner in J Personal Soc Psychol 1(4):355–360, 1980). However, few studies have investigated minority group derogation as a just world preservation strategy after instances of intergroup harm-doing. This study is among the first to demonstrate the derogation of both individual victims and of the victim’s minority group experimentally, using the context of a racist hate crime in Australia. In the present experiment, participants (N = 110) read a news article describing a hate crime against an Aboriginal Australian teenager and were informed that the perpetrator was harshly or leniently punished (secure vs. justice threat condition). Our results show that in the justice threat condition, participants not only derogated the individual Aboriginal Australian victim more after his death, they also expressed greater racism toward the victim’s group. An indirect effect of the justice threat condition on modern racism via individual victim derogation was observed, along with moderating effects of individual differences in belief in a just world. These findings provide support for the alarming hypothesis that racist hate crimes are not only the manifestation of a racist society, but may also bolster racial prejudices if leniently treated. The results highlight the important role of political and judicial authorities, whose response or non-response to a hate crime can exacerbate or ameliorate existing prejudices.     

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co.: Supreme Court Expands Rights of Regulated Parties to Challenge Agency Decisions

This article analyzes the potential impacts of the Supreme Court's recent decision in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. Prior to this decision, federal agency action that merely provided information could not be challenged because of the Administrative Procedure Act allowed parties to challenge only “final agency action.” The Court recognized that some actions that merely provide information can be final because they have legal consequences. To understand the extent to which the Hawkes decision expands the right to challenge agency action, the article compares the Hawkes decision with the Court's decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, where the Court also discussed the issue of “final agency action.” The article concludes that the Court's reasoning regarding what type of consequences make an action “final” is the key to understanding what regulatory action can now be challenged.     

On the Utility of Religious Toleration

Brian Leiter’s Why Tolerate Religion? valuably clarifies the issues involved in granting religion-specific accommodations (and thus exceptions or exemptions) to laws and policies of general application. His arguments are careful, rigorous, and fair, and in rejecting the deontological arguments for religion-specific accommodations he seems to me largely correct. But when he turns to arguing against the utilitarian case for such accommodations, he employs a seemingly non-standard sense of utilitarianism in which demands of principled consistency constrain what would otherwise be utilitarian welfare-maximization. A more traditional and stronger version of utilitarianism, however, has room for seemingly unprincipled or even irrational distinctions as long as employing those distinctions is utility- or welfare-maximizing. And thus although Leiter’s arguments against the deontological justifications for religion-specific accommodations are largely successful, his arguments against utilitarian justifications, by relying more heavily on the notion of “principle” than a utilitarian should accept, are open to challenge.     

Occupational exposure to traumatic evidence and posttraumatic stress symptoms in forensic science professionals: Prevalence and patterns

Forensic science professionals are routinely exposed to potentially traumatizing evidence. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of occupational posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among forensic science professionals, identify job-related correlates of PTSD symptoms, and examine the role of social support in mitigating PTSD symptomology. In response to recruitment through the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors, and Evidence Technology Magazine, 449 forensic science professionals participated in the current study. Results found that 73.5% (n = 330) of the overall sample experienced at least one work-related traumatic event consistent with meeting Criterion A for PTSD, and these rates were higher for field-based respondents (n = 203, 87.9%). The prevalence of past-month provisional PTSD was 21.6% for the full sample. Disaggregated PTSD rates were 29.0% and 14.5% for field-based and non-field-based respondents, respectively. These rates were 6- to 8-fold higher than the past-year prevalence of PTSD in the general US population, estimated to be 3.5%, and were found to be at least as high as those observed in prior epidemiological research with non-treatment seeking members of the US military deployed to war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. Results further showed that social support was protective against PTSD symptomology. The high rates of occupational exposure to trauma and consequent PTSD symptomology observed in this large sample of forensic science professionals highlight the under-acknowledged psychological risks of these occupations and the need for enhanced attention to mental health resources for these professionals.     

Should Banks Change Their Environmental Due Diligence Policies to Reflect the Revised USEPA Rule on All Appropriate Inquiry?

This article raises questions about the environmental due diligence programs common among lenders and suggests changes. The article describes the statutory, regulatory, and case law changes that have largely eliminated the liability risk that caused lenders to institute due diligence programs, and questions whether lenders have an interest in requiring borrowers to follow the new ASTM standard. The article examines the differences between environmental liabilities and environmental costs and explains why those differences should be taken into account. Finally, the article recommends a case-by-case approach to dealing with environmental issues rather than the simplistic view that looks at environmental due diligence as a yes or no question.