Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Making Law and Courts Research Relevant : The Normative Implications of Empirical Research.

By: Bartels, Brandon L.
Contributor(s): Bonneau, Chris W.
Material type: TextTextSeries: eBooks on Demand.Law, Courts and Politics Ser: Publisher: London : Routledge, 2014Copyright date: ©2014Description: 1 online resource (261 pages).Content type: text Media type: computer Carrier type: online resourceISBN: 9781317693468.Subject(s): Law -- Research | Law -- United StatesGenre/Form: Electronic books.Additional physical formats: Print version:: Making Law and Courts Research Relevant : The Normative Implications of Empirical ResearchDDC classification: 340.072 Online resources: Click here to view this ebook.
Contents:
Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- CONTENTS -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- PART I The Enterprise of Normative Implications of Empirical Research -- 1 The Normative Implications of Empirical Research: A Research Agenda -- 2 Some Ideas on How Political Scientists Can Develop Real-World Implications from Their Research (Without Becoming Policy Wonks or Law Professors) -- PART II Law and Decisionmaking -- 3 The Rule of Law and the Empirical Study of Rules -- 4 Judicial Behavior and Judicial Review -- 5 On Substance and Rhetoric in Constitutional Law -- 6 The Role of Courts in the Policymaking Process -- 7 White Lies: Social Science Research, Judicial Decision-Making, and the Fallacy of Objectivity -- PART III Judicial Selection -- 8 Advice and Consent in a Polarized Era: Time to Pull a Normative Alarm? -- 9 The Different Manifestations of Representative Drift on U.S. State and Federal Courts -- 10 The Use and Abuse of Empirical Evidence in Support of Normative Arguments on Judicial Selection -- 11 Bridging the Gap between Science and Politics: Lessons from the Judicial Elections Controversy -- 12 Unpacking the Debate on Judicial Appointments outside the United States: What Research Might Be Able to Contribute to the Normative Conversation -- PART IV Courts in the Broader Political and Societal Context -- 13 The Normative Element of Legitimacy -- 14 Can the U.S. Supreme Court Have Too Much Legitimacy? -- 15 Government Noncompliance with Constitutional Court Orders in South Africa -- 16 Race and Legitimacy for the Federal Courts -- 17 Day-to-Day Legitimacy: First Instance Forums Broadly Construed -- PART V Conclusion -- 18 Can Empirical Research Be Relevant to the Policy Process? Understanding the Obstacles and Exploiting the Opportunities -- Appendix -- About the Contributors -- Index.
Summary: One of the more enduring topics of concern for empirically-oriented scholars of law and courts-and political scientists more generally-is how research can be more directly relevant to broader audiences outside of academia. A significant part of this issue goes back to a seeming disconnect between empirical and normative scholars of law and courts that has increased in recent years. Brandon L. Bartels and Chris W. Bonneau argue that being attuned to the normative implications of one's work enhances the quality of empirical work, not to mention makes it substantially more interesting to both academics and non-academic practitioners. Their book's mission is to examine how the normative implications of empirical work in law and courts can be more visible and relevant to audiences beyond academia. Written by scholars of political science, law, and sociology, the chapters in the volume offer ideas on a methodology for communicating normative implications in a balanced, nuanced, and modest manner. The contributors argue that if empirical work is strongly suggestive of certain policy or institutional changes, scholars should make those implications known so that information can be diffused. The volume consists of four sections that respectively address the general enterprise of developing normative implications of empirical research, law and decisionmaking, judicial selection, and courts in the broader political and societal context. This volume represents the start of a conversation on the topic of how the normative implications of empirical research in law and courts can be made more visible. This book will primarily interest scholars of law and courts, as well as students of judicial politics. Other subfields of political science engaging in empirical research will also find the suggestions made in the book relevant.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Item type Current location Call number URL Status Date due Barcode
Electronic Book UT Tyler Online
Online
KF389 .M35 2014 (Browse shelf) https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uttyler/detail.action?docID=1779210 Available EBC1779210

Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- CONTENTS -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- PART I The Enterprise of Normative Implications of Empirical Research -- 1 The Normative Implications of Empirical Research: A Research Agenda -- 2 Some Ideas on How Political Scientists Can Develop Real-World Implications from Their Research (Without Becoming Policy Wonks or Law Professors) -- PART II Law and Decisionmaking -- 3 The Rule of Law and the Empirical Study of Rules -- 4 Judicial Behavior and Judicial Review -- 5 On Substance and Rhetoric in Constitutional Law -- 6 The Role of Courts in the Policymaking Process -- 7 White Lies: Social Science Research, Judicial Decision-Making, and the Fallacy of Objectivity -- PART III Judicial Selection -- 8 Advice and Consent in a Polarized Era: Time to Pull a Normative Alarm? -- 9 The Different Manifestations of Representative Drift on U.S. State and Federal Courts -- 10 The Use and Abuse of Empirical Evidence in Support of Normative Arguments on Judicial Selection -- 11 Bridging the Gap between Science and Politics: Lessons from the Judicial Elections Controversy -- 12 Unpacking the Debate on Judicial Appointments outside the United States: What Research Might Be Able to Contribute to the Normative Conversation -- PART IV Courts in the Broader Political and Societal Context -- 13 The Normative Element of Legitimacy -- 14 Can the U.S. Supreme Court Have Too Much Legitimacy? -- 15 Government Noncompliance with Constitutional Court Orders in South Africa -- 16 Race and Legitimacy for the Federal Courts -- 17 Day-to-Day Legitimacy: First Instance Forums Broadly Construed -- PART V Conclusion -- 18 Can Empirical Research Be Relevant to the Policy Process? Understanding the Obstacles and Exploiting the Opportunities -- Appendix -- About the Contributors -- Index.

One of the more enduring topics of concern for empirically-oriented scholars of law and courts-and political scientists more generally-is how research can be more directly relevant to broader audiences outside of academia. A significant part of this issue goes back to a seeming disconnect between empirical and normative scholars of law and courts that has increased in recent years. Brandon L. Bartels and Chris W. Bonneau argue that being attuned to the normative implications of one's work enhances the quality of empirical work, not to mention makes it substantially more interesting to both academics and non-academic practitioners. Their book's mission is to examine how the normative implications of empirical work in law and courts can be more visible and relevant to audiences beyond academia. Written by scholars of political science, law, and sociology, the chapters in the volume offer ideas on a methodology for communicating normative implications in a balanced, nuanced, and modest manner. The contributors argue that if empirical work is strongly suggestive of certain policy or institutional changes, scholars should make those implications known so that information can be diffused. The volume consists of four sections that respectively address the general enterprise of developing normative implications of empirical research, law and decisionmaking, judicial selection, and courts in the broader political and societal context. This volume represents the start of a conversation on the topic of how the normative implications of empirical research in law and courts can be made more visible. This book will primarily interest scholars of law and courts, as well as students of judicial politics. Other subfields of political science engaging in empirical research will also find the suggestions made in the book relevant.

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Author notes provided by Syndetics

<p>Brandon L. Bartels is Associate Professor of Political Science at George Washington University. His research focuses on judicial decision making, the U.S. Supreme Court, and public perceptions of law, courts, and institutional legitimacy. His work has been published in the American Political Science Review , American Journal of Political Science , Journal of Politics , Public Opinion Quarterly , and other outlets.</p> <p> Chris W. Bonneau is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Pittsburgh. His research focuses on judicial selection and has been published in journals such as the American Journal of Political Science , Journal of Politics , and others. He is co-author of In Defense of Judicial Elections and Strategic Behavior and Policy Choice on the U.S. Supreme Court .</p>

There are no comments for this item.

Log in to your account to post a comment.