Routledge Handbook of Judicial Behavior

Interest in social science and empirical analyses of law, courts and specifically the politics of judges has never been higher or more salient. Consequently, there is a strong need for theoretical work on the research that focuses on courts, judges and the judicial process. The Routledge Handbook of Judicial Behavior provides the most up to date examination of scholarship across the entire spectrum of judicial politics and behavior, written by a combination of currently prominent scholars and the emergent next generation of researchers. Unlike almost all other volumes, this Handbook examines judicial behavior from both an American and Comparative perspective. Part 1 provides a broad overview of the dominant Theoretical and Methodological perspectives used to examine and understand judicial behavior, Part 2 offers an in-depth analysis of the various current scholarly areas examining the U.S. Supreme Court, Part 3 moves from the Supreme Court to examining other U.S. federal and state courts, and Part 4 presents a comprehensive overview of Comparative Judicial Politics and Transnational Courts. Each author in this volume provides perspectives on the most current methodological and substantive approaches in their respective areas, along with suggestions for future research. The chapters contained within will generate additional scholarly and public interest by focusing on topics most salient to the academic, legal and policy communities.

Table of Contents:
Introduction: Understanding Judicial Behavior—A Work in Progress Robert M. Howard and Kirk A. Randazzo. Part 1: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives 1. The Attitudinal Model Jeffrey A. Segal and Alan J. Champlin 2. Law and Politics in Judicial and Supreme Court Decision-Making J. Mitchell Pickerill and Christopher Brough 3. Strategic Accounts of Judging Lee Epstein and Jack Knight 4. Measuring Ideology on the Courts Michael A. Bailey 5. Measuring Law Tom S. Clark Part 2: The U.S. Supreme Court 6. Historical Development of Supreme Court Research Christopher N. Krewson and Ryan J. Owens 7. Law and Policy in Decision Making Lawrence Baum 8. U.S. Supreme Court Legitimacy: Unanswered Questions and an Agenda for Future Research Michael J. Nelson and James L. Gibson 9. The Selection of U.S. Supreme Court Justices James ben-Aaron, Paul M. Collins, Jr., and Lori A. Ringhand 10. Opinion Writing in the U.S. Supreme Court Pamela C. Corley and Artemus Ward 11. Making Sense of the Supreme Court—Public Opinion Relationship Peter K. Enns and Patrick C. Wohlfarth 12. Of Political Principals and Legal Principles: The Solicitor General of the United States Richard L. Pacelle, Jr. 13. Oral Arguments Timothy R. Johnson and Thomas K. Pryor Part 3: Other U.S. Courts 14. The Court of Appeals Susan Haire, Reginald S. Sheehan, and Ali S. Masood 15. U.S. District Courts Christina L. Boyd and Ethan D. Boldt 16. What Is So Special About Specialized Courts in the United States? Isaac Unah and Ryan Williams 17. Decision Making in State Supreme Courts Melinda Gann Hall 18. Lower Federal Court Confirmations: Motivations and Strategies Amy Steigerwalt and Wendy L. Martinek 19. Judicial Selection in the States: A Look Back, A Look Ahead Christopher W. Bonneau and Heather Marie Rice Part 4: Comparative Judicial Politics and Transnational Courts 20. Judicial Independence Research Beyond the Crossroads Jeffrey Kaplan Staton 21. Strategic Behavior of Comparative Courts Brad Epperly and Monica Lineberger 22. Courts in Developed Countries Michael C. Tolley 23. Courts And Decision Making in Developing Democracies Lee Demetrius Walker 24. Law and Courts in Authoritarian Regimes Tamir Moustafa 25. The International Court of Justice Sara McLaughlin Mitchell and Andrew P. Owsiak 26. The European Court of Justice Jay N. Krehbiel, Matthew J. Gabel, and Clifford J. Carrubba 27. Turning to Regional Courts: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Rebecca Reid. Conclusion: Where Do We Go From Here? Robert M. Howard and Kirk A. Randazzo

About the Author :
Robert M. Howard is professor of political science at Georgia State University. His main research interests are the impact of courts and litigation on social and public policy, and judicial decision making by the federal courts. He is the author of numerous articles and books, including Judging Law and Policy: Courts and Policymaking in the American Political System and Getting a Poor Return: Courts, Justice and Taxes. Dr. Howard has been the editor of the Justice System Journal as well as the editor of the book series Law, Courts, and Politics. Kirk A. Randazzo is professor of political science at the University of South Carolina. His research focuses on judicial behavior in the United States under a variety of potential constraints and the effects of judicial independence for emerging democracies. His work has been published in several prestigious journals, including the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Politics, and Political Research Quarterly. Additionally, he has published three books, the latest of which is Checking the Courts: Law, Ideology, and Contingent Discretion (co-authored with Richard W. Waterman), published in 2014 by SUNY Press.

Review :
'In this edited volume, Professors Howard and Randazzo have produced an impressively comprehensive compilation of essays and analyses from many of the most insightful and productive scholars in the field of judicial politics. Among the volume’s major contributions is its section on comparative and international courts, an area of growing importance and impact in the study of law and courts. The editors’ meta-analytic essays bind the chapters together with key observations about current and future research to help students, scholars and citizens understand and evaluate institutional and behavioral dimensions to the rule of law.' - Stefanie A. Lindquist, Foundation Professor of Law and Political Science, Arizona State University 'This volume is a tour de force of the best of judicial politics. Howard and Randazzo compiled essays written by a veritable who’s who of judicial politics. The breadth of topics reflects the range of subjects examined by judicial scholars from the Supreme Court and other American courts to comparative and transnational courts. This book promises to become one of the standard reviews of judicial behavior, offering a master class on the competing theoretical accounts, methodological issues, and classic empirical puzzles.' - Paul Wahlbeck, Professor of Political Science, George Washington University 'Bob Howard and Kirk Randazzo have put together a comprehensive collection review essays in nearly every significant topic related to judicial decision-making, written by the most accomplished experts in the field. This volume is well-suited for a graduate course in judicial politics, because each chapter provides a sophisticated entrée into a particular subject, but could also be appropriate for advanced undergraduates.' - Joseph L. Smith, Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science,