Do a law's policy implications affect beliefs about its constitutionality? An experimental test

被引:14
作者
Furgeson, Joshua R. [1 ]
Babcock, Linda [2 ]
Shane, Peter M. [3 ]
机构
[1] Argosy Fdn, Milwaukee, WI USA
[2] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Heinz Sch Publ Policy & Management, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
关键词
constitutional decisions; legal decision-making; motivated reasoning; policy preferences; judicial review;
D O I
10.1007/s10979-007-9102-z
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Although a substantial empirical literature has found associations between judges' political orientation and their judicial decisions, the nature of the relationship between policy preferences and constitutional reasoning remains unclear. In this experimental study, law students were asked to determine the constitutionality of a hypothetical law, where the policy implications of the law were manipulated while holding all legal evidence constant. The data indicate that, even with an incentive to select the ruling best supported by the legal evidence, liberal participants were more likely to overturn laws that decreased taxes than laws that increased taxes. The opposite pattern held for conservatives. The experimental manipulation significantly affected even those participants who believed their policy preferences had no influence on their constitutional decisions.
引用
收藏
页码:219 / 227
页数:9
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1970, LAW MODERN MIND
[2]  
[Anonymous], ATTITUDINAL MODEL AU
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1992, JUDGING GOOD FAITH
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1999, Majority Rule or Minority Will: Adherence to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court
[5]  
Babcock L, 1995, AM ECON REV, V85, P1337
[6]  
BARNES SH, 1988, POLITICAL BEHAV, V0010
[7]  
Baum Lawrence, 1998, PUZZLE JUDICIAL BEHA
[8]  
BORK R. H., 1990, The tempting of America: the political seduction of the law
[9]  
BOWER AD, 1987, J FAM PRACTICE, V24, P612
[10]   Reasoning on the threshold: Testing the separability of preferences in legal decision making [J].
Braman, E .
JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2006, 68 (02) :308-321