Speaking with One Voice?: Ethno-national Division on the Constitutional Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina

The challenge of designing institutions to manage ethno-national conflict is one of the enduring concerns of political science. One important but relatively understudied aspect of this challenge is the design of constitutional courts. Courts are likely to play a key role in the maintenence of a constitutional settlement. But this role can be especially onerous in a deeply divided and post-conflict setting where the rule of law is weak and judges have ethno-national affiliations that may undermine the appearance of judicial neutrality. In such contexts, a court’s authority (including compliance with its decisions) cannot be taken for granted.

With reference the Constitutional Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and using an original dataset of the Court's non-unanimous plenary decisions, we test several hypotheses about the degree to which ethno-national affiliation influences judicial behavior. We find that (1) judges on the Constitutional Court do in fact divide predictably along ethno-national lines, (2) that these patterns are robust to changes in the tenure system, and (3) are independent of party political background.

Ensaios sobre o poder judiciário no Brasil

A tese apresenta três ensaios empíricos sobre os padrões decisórios de magistrados no Brasil, elaborados à partir de bases de dados inéditas e de larga escala, que contém detalhes de dezenas de milhares de processos judiciais na primeira e na segunda instância. As bases de dados são coletadas pelo próprio autor através de programas-robô de coleta em massa de informações, aplicados aos "links" de acompanhamento processual de tribunais estaduais no Brasil (Paraná, Minas Gerais e Santa Catarina). O primeiro artigo avalia - com base em modelo estatístico - a importância de fatores extra-legais sobre os resultados de ações judiciais, na Justiça Estadual do Paraná. Isto é, se os juízes favorecem sistematicamente a parte hipossuficiente (beneficiária de Assistência Judiciária Gratuita). No segundo artigo, estuda-se a relação entre a duração de ações cíveis no primeiro grau e a probabilidade de reforma da sentença, utilizando-se dados da Justiça Estadual de Minas Gerais. O objetivo é avaliar se existe um dilema entre a duração e a qualidade das sentenças. Dito de outra forma, se existe um dilema entre a observância do direito ao devido processo legal e a celeridade processual. O último artigo teste a hipótese - no âmbito de apelações criminais e incidentes recursais no Tribunal de Justiça de Santa Catarina - de que as origens profissionais dos desembargadores influenciam seus padrões decisórios. Isto é, testa-se a hipótese de que desembargadores/relatores oriundos da carreira da advocacia são mais "garantistas" ( e desembargadores oriundos da carreira do Ministério Público são menos "garantistas") relativamente aos seus pares oriundos da carreira da magistratura. Testam-se as hipóteses com base em um modelo estatístico que explica a probabilidade de uma decisão recursal favorável ao réu, em função da origem de carreira do relator do recurso, além de um conjunto de características do processo e do órgão julgador.

The Supreme Court Confirmation Process and Its Implications

In recent history, there has been a trend of increasing partisan polarization throughout most of the American political system. Some of the impacts of this polarization are obvious; however, there is reason to believe that we miss some of the indirect effects of polarization. Accompanying the trend of increased polarization has been an increase in the contentiousness of the Supreme Court confirmation process. I believe that these two trends are related. Furthermore, I argue that these trends have an impact on judicial behavior. This is an issue worth exploring, since the Supreme Court is the most isolated branch of the federal government. The Constitution structured the Supreme Court to ensure that it was as isolated as possible from short-term political pressures and interests. This study attempts to show how it may be possible that those goals are no longer being fully achieved. My first hypothesis in this study is that increases in partisan polarization are a direct cause of the increase in the level of contention during the confirmation process. I then hypothesize that the more contention a justice faces during his or her confirmation process, the more ideologically extreme that justice will then vote on the bench. This means that a nominee appointed by a Republican president will tend to vote even more conservatively than was anticipated following a contentious confirmation process, and vice versa for Democratic appointees. In order to test these hypotheses, I developed a data set for every Supreme Court nominee dating back to President Franklin D. Roosevelt¿s appointments (1937). With this data set, I ran a series of regression models to analyze these relationships. Statistically speaking, the results support my first hypothesis in a fairly robust manner. My regression results for my second hypothesis indicate that the trend I am looking for is present for Republican nominees. For Democratic nominees, the impacts are less robust. Nonetheless, as the results will show, contention during the confirmation process does seem to have some impact on judicial behavior. Following my quantitative analysis, I analyze a series of case studies. These case studies serve to provide tangible examples of these statistical trends as well as to explore what else may be going on during the confirmation process and subsequent judicial decision-making. I use Justices Stevens, Rehnquist, and Alito as the subjects for these case studies. These cases will show that the trends described above do seem to be identifiable at the level of an individual case. These studies further help to indicate other potential impacts on judicial behavior. For example, following Justice Rehnquist¿s move from Associate to Chief Justice, we see a marked change in his behavior. Overall, this study serves as a means of analyzing some of the more indirect impacts of partisan polarization in modern politics. Further, the study offers a means of exploring some of the possible constraints (both conscious and subconscious) that Supreme Court justices may feel while they decide how to cast a vote in a particular case. Given the wide-reaching implications of Supreme Court decisions, it is important to try to grasp a full view of how these decisions are made.

Bias on the Bench: How Judges’ Legal Backgrounds Influence Their Decisions

The ideal conception of a judge is that of a neutral arbitrator. However, there exist good reasons to believe that personal characteristics, including professional experiences, bias judges. Such suspicions inspired two hypotheses: (1) judges that are former prosecutors are biased in favor of the government in criminal appeals; (2) judges that are former criminal defense attorneys are biased in favor of the criminal appellant. These hypotheses were tested by gathering professional information about state supreme court judges in the south during the years from 1995 until 1998. That was then matched to an existing database that recorded those judges’ demographics and decisions in criminal appeals during that time. Logistic regressions of that data revealed that despite when other characteristics, including gender, race, and legal experience, were accounted for, criminal defense remained a statistically significant predictor. Judges with a background in criminal defense were more likely to reverse criminal court decisions. In contrast, prosecutorial experience was not a good predictor of how a judge ruled. Judges that had backgrounds in prosecution did not rule much differently than those that did not have such a background.

They’re There, Now What?: The Identities, Behaviors, and Perceptions of Black Judges

Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, fewer than 50 Black judges had been elected or appointed to the judiciary. As of August 2015, there are over 1,000 Black state and federal judges. As the number of black judges has increased, one question arises: have American courts been altered purely by this substantial increase? One expectation—and, at times, a prediction—behind the increased descriptive representation of Black judges is that their mere presence would alter the judiciary. It was supposed that these judges would substantively represent Black interests in the decisions they made. In other words, it was suspected, and predicted, that Blacks in the judiciary would enhance equality and justice by being aware of, responsive to, and advocating for African Americans. This theory about the likely role of Black judges derives from theoretical work on political representation and racial group consciousness, and empirical studies of Black elite behavior in other political institutions.

Despite such predictions, there is no corresponding scholarly consensus regarding whether Black judges possess a racial group consciousness and have racially distinctive judicial behavior. Therefore, the theory undergirding the demand for increased diversification, as a means to transform the judiciary, remains unsubstantiated. This is precisely where this project, “They’re There, Now What?: The Identities, Behavior, and Perceptions of Black Judges,” seeks to intervene in and explore, if not settle, the matter of whether black judges possess a racial group consciousness and exhibit racially-distinctive judicial behavior. It addresses a set of interrelated questions relevant to understanding whether we can view Black judges as representatives in ways that are similar to how we view other Black political officials. I examine these questions using a multi-method approach. For my analyses, I draw on diverse materials: the published biographies of every Black judge appointed to the federal bench, a survey experiment with a nationally-representative adult sample, and semi-structured interviews with 30 Black judges.

This research, which engages with scholarship on representation, group consciousness, judicial behavior, and candidate perceptions, offers new insights into the lives, perceptions, and behavior of Black judges, as well as the manifestations of Black substantive representation in the judiciary. My dissertation argues that, despite the general reluctance to use the term “representation” when referring to judges, we can consider Black judges as representatives. Black judges behave as substantive representatives by (1) sharing and understanding the experience, history, and perspectives of Black Americans, (2) challenging language, persons, policies, and laws they feel negatively affect, or violate the rights and liberties of, African Americans, (3) respecting African American litigants, and (4) ensuring the rights of African Americans are protected and the needs of black Americans are being met.

Only through research that considers the perspectives, identities, perceptions, and behavior of Black judges will we arrive at a more comprehensive understanding of the importance of racial diversity in the courts. As this project finds, a link between descriptive representation and substantive representation can, and frequently does exist within the judicial context. Such a link is significant given that Blacks’ liberty and justice through the American legal system continues to be subject to those who exercise judicial power. This dissertation has implications for the discourse surrounding the need for increased descriptive and substantive representation of Blacks in the judiciary, and the factors that affect representation in the justice system.

El desempeño del abogado en el proceso judicial penal

Resumen: La actuación del abogado en el proceso judicial penal contribuye a la tutela del derecho a la defensa, a la intimidad, así como a la búsqueda de la verdad y de la justicia. Se presentan entonces los lineamentos centrales para tener en cuenta en el desempeño del abogado defensor, la importancia de su adecuada elección, considerando sus cualidades, experiencia y un fehaciente conocimiento del derecho canónico. Se recuerda que todo el proceso requiere de razonabilidad y proporcionalidad, en el que la actuación del abogado estará impregnada de las virtudes teologales para su correcto desempeño.

Ativismo judicial no Brasil : o Supremo Tribunal Federal como arena de deliberação política

Questão de grande relevância, nos dias atuais, no âmbito da Ciência Política, diz respeito às decisões políticas tomadas pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, o que se denomina ativismo judicial. O termo ativismo judicial indica que a Corte está deixando de se restringir à atividade interpretativa, para estabelecer novas condutas, criando direito novo. A tendência tem sido a de levar as questões políticas para serem debatidas no âmbito judicial, de forma que assuntos políticos passam a ser exteriorizados como jurídicos. Em todos esses temas, devemos ter em conta que o balizamento tanto da atividade política como da atuação jurídica é a Constituição. Todavia, o que se tem observado é que Supremo passou a adotar uma nova postura interpretativa, de modo a permitir que, por via hermenêutica, torne-se possível corrigir a lei, modificá-la ou mesmo criar direito novo onde a lei nada especifica, além de permitir a criação de normas de caráter constitucional por decisão judicial. Três casos importantes ilustram bem esse cenário: a verticalização das coligações, a instalação obrigatória de comissões parlamentares de inquérito e a perda de mandato decorrente da troca de partido. Por serem temas de cunho eminentemente político, as decisões judiciais proferidas nessas matérias enquadram-se bem no campo do ativismo judicial, daí por que foram escolhidos como estudos de caso. O objetivo da tese é identificar as causas dessa nova postura do Supremo Tribunal Federal, tendo em vista que ela rompe com o entendimento adotado na jurisprudência anterior, em que essas mesmas matérias eram consideradas estritamente políticas e, portanto, fora da competência decisória da Corte.

Ativismo judicial no Brasil : o Supremo Tribunal Federal como arena de deliberação politica

Questão de grande relevância, nos dias atuais, no âmbito da Ciência Política, diz respeito às decisões políticas tomadas pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, o que se denomina ativismo judicial. O termo ativismo judicial indica que a Corte está deixando de se restringir à atividade interpretativa, para estabelecer novas condutas, criando direito novo. A tendência tem sido a de levar as questões políticas para serem debatidas no âmbito judicial, de forma que assuntos políticos passam a ser exteriorizados como jurídicos. Em todos esses temas, devemos ter em conta que o balizamento tanto da atividade política como da atuação jurídica é a Constituição. Todavia, o que se tem observado é que Supremo passou a adotar uma nova postura interpretativa, de modo a permitir que, por via hermenêutica, torne-se possível corrigir a lei, modificá-la ou mesmo criar direito novo onde a lei nada especifica, além de permitir a criação de normas de caráter constitucional por decisão judicial. Três casos importantes ilustram bem esse cenário: a verticalização das coligações, a instalação obrigatória de comissões parlamentares de inquérito e a perda de mandato decorrente da troca de partido. Por serem temas de cunho eminentemente político, as decisões judiciais proferidas nessas matérias enquadram-se bem no campo do ativismo judicial, daí por que foram escolhidos como estudos de caso. O objetivo desta tese é identificar as causas dessa nova postura do Supremo Tribunal Federal, tendo em vista que ela rompe com o entendimento adotado na jurisprudência anterior, em que essas mesmas matérias eram consideradas estritamente políticas e, portanto, fora da competência decisória da Corte

Agents, Trustees, and International Courts: Nomination and Appointment of Judicial Candidates in the WTO Appellate Body

Scholars have increasingly theorized, and debated, the decision by states to create and delegate authority to international courts, as well as the subsequent autonomy and behavior of those courts, with principal–agent and trusteeship models disagreeing on the nature and extent of states’ influence on international judges. This article formulates and tests a set of principal–agent hypotheses about the ways in which, and the conditions under which, member states are able use their powers of judicial nomination and appointment to influence the endogenous preferences of international judges. The empirical analysis surveys the record of all judicial appointments to the Appellate Body (AB) of the World Trade Organization over a 15-year period. We present a view of an AB appointment process that, far from representing a pure search for expertise, is deeply politicized and offers member-state principals opportunities to influence AB members ex ante and possibly ex post. We further demonstrate that the AB nomination process has become progressively more politicized over time as member states, responding to earlier and controversial AB decisions, became far more concerned about judicial activism and more interested in the substantive opinions of AB candidates, systematically championing candidates whose views on key issues most closely approached their own, and opposing candidates perceived to be activist or biased against their substantive preferences. Although specific to the WTO, our theory and findings have implications for the judicial politics of a large variety of global and regional international courts and tribunals.

The Behavior of Hydroxyl Units of Synthetic Goethite and its Dehydroxylated Product Hematite

The behavior of the hydroxyl units of synthetic goethite and its dehydroxylated product hematite was characterized using a combination of Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction (XRD) during the thermal transformation over a temperature range of 180-270 degrees C. Hematite was detected at temperatures above 200 degrees C by XRD while goethite was not observed above 230 degrees C. Five intense OH vibrations at 3212-3194, 1687-1674, 1643-1640, 888-884 and 800-798 cm(-1), and a H2O vibration at 3450-3445 cm(-1) were observed for goethite. The intensity of hydroxyl stretching and bending vibrations decreased with the extent of dehydroxylation of goethite. Infrared absorption bands clearly show the phase transformation between goethite and hematite: in particular. the migration of excess hydroxyl units from goethite to hematite. Two bands at 536-533 and 454-452 cm(-1) are the low wavenumber vibrations of Fe-O in the hematite structure. Band component analysis data of FTIR spectra support the fact that the hydroxyl units mainly affect the a plane in goethite and the equivalent c plane in hematite.

Let's Dance: A Language for Service Behavior Modeling

In Service-Oriented Architectures (SOAs), software systems are decomposed into independent units, namely services, that interact with one another through message exchanges. To promote reuse and evolvability, these interactions are explicitly described right from the early phases of the development lifecycle. Up to now, emphasis has been placed on capturing structural aspects of service interactions. Gradually though, the description of behavioral dependencies between service interactions is gaining increasing attention as a means to push forward the SOA vision. This paper deals with the description of these behavioral dependencies during the analysis and design phases. The paper outlines a set of requirements that a language for modeling service interactions at this level should fulfill, and proposes a language whose design is driven by these requirements.