This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Giles, M. W Articles by Peppers, T. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Picking Federal Judges: A Note on Policy and Partisan Selection Agendas

Emory University

Virginia A. Hettinger

Indiana University

Todd Peppers

Emory University

The importance of lower federal courts in the policymaking process has stimulated extensive research programs focused on the process of selecting the judges of these courts and the factors influencing their decisions. The present study employs judicial decisionmaking in the U.S. Courts of Appeals as a window through which to reexamine the politics of selection to the lower courts. It differs from previous studies of selection in three ways. First, it takes advantage of recent innovations in measurement to go beyond reliance on political party as a measure of the preferences of actors in the selection process. Second, employing these new measures it examines the relative effects of the operation of policy and partisan agendas in the selection process. Third, a more complex model of selection is assessed than in most previous studies-one that expressly examines the role of senators and senatorial preferences in the selection process. The results clearly suggest that the politics of selection differ dramatically depending upon whether or not senatorial courtesy is in operation. The voting behavior of Courts of Appeals judges selected without senatorial courtesy is consistent with the operation of a presidential policy agenda. Among judges selected when senatorial courtesy is in play, the linkage between presidential preferences and judicial outcomes disappears.

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 3, 623-641 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/106591290105400307


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Scherer and B. Miller The Federalist Society's Influence on the Federal Judiciary Political Research Quarterly, June 1, 2009; 62(2): 366 - 378. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. A. Randazzo Strategic Anticipation and the Hierarchy of Justice in U.S. District Courts American Politics Research, September 1, 2008; 36(5): 669 - 693. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Collins and L. Moyer Gender, Race, and Intersectionality on the Federal Appellate Bench Political Research Quarterly, June 1, 2008; 61(2): 219 - 227. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. S. Clark A Principal-Agent Theory of En Banc Review J. Law Econ. Organ., May 4, 2008; (2008) ewn008v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. M. Howard Getting a Poor Return: Courts, Justice and Governing Coalitions and the Audits of Low-Income Taxpayers Journal of Theoretical Politics, April 1, 2008; 20(2): 181 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Buchman The Effects of Ideology on Federal Trial Judges' Decisions to Admit Scientific Expert Testimony American Politics Research, September 1, 2007; 35(5): 671 - 693. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Curry Institutions, Interests, and Judicial Outcomes: The Politics of Federal Diversity Jurisdiction Political Research Quarterly, September 1, 2007; 60(3): 454 - 467. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Epstein, A. D. Martin, J. A. Segal, and C. Westerland The Judicial Common Space J. Law Econ. Organ., June 1, 2007; 23(2): 303 - 325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. D. Massie, T. G. Hansford, and D. R. Songer The Timing of Presidential Nominations to the Lower Federal Courts Political Research Quarterly, March 1, 2004; 57(1): 145 - 154. [Abstract] [PDF]