![2016 - Spring Scholars Week](../../../../assets/md5images/4b6f656f3b73b7d20e9e735acfe334b1.png)
List all Project Mentors & Advisor(s)
Dr. Rosenberger
Presentation Format
Poster Presentation
Abstract/Description
This study expands Segal and Spaeth's (2002) attitudinal model. This model is used to predict Supreme Court justices's decision making process when it decides on cases. However, there is no mention on the types of cases and those groups that have higher accessibility (such as trade organizations) compared to individuals. If the attitudinal model is true, then justices will vote according to their ideology. This study first defines their ideology when they first entered the court, then this study analyzed cases from 2010 -2015 and looked at each case according to five categories. Categories of civil rights, criminal, economic, union, and taxation were scored on how the justice's vote and the ideology of the case. Results show that in most cases the attitudinal model was correct with the exception of economics and taxation. Discussion of what this may infer and other possible variable that impacted this study.
Location
Large Ballroom, Curris Center
Start Date
April 2016
End Date
April 2016
Included in
Where is the Justice? A Critical View of the Supreme Court
Large Ballroom, Curris Center
This study expands Segal and Spaeth's (2002) attitudinal model. This model is used to predict Supreme Court justices's decision making process when it decides on cases. However, there is no mention on the types of cases and those groups that have higher accessibility (such as trade organizations) compared to individuals. If the attitudinal model is true, then justices will vote according to their ideology. This study first defines their ideology when they first entered the court, then this study analyzed cases from 2010 -2015 and looked at each case according to five categories. Categories of civil rights, criminal, economic, union, and taxation were scored on how the justice's vote and the ideology of the case. Results show that in most cases the attitudinal model was correct with the exception of economics and taxation. Discussion of what this may infer and other possible variable that impacted this study.