小组的形成

Chris Hanretty
{"title":"小组的形成","authors":"Chris Hanretty","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197509234.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter looks at the identity of the judges chosen to hear each case. The Supreme Court is unlike other courts: it does not sit en banc, and the five-, seven-, or nine-judge panels are not chosen randomly, but are drawn up by court officials working together with senior judges. This chapter looks at explanations of how these panels are chosen. The key finding is that specialists in the relevant area of law are prohibitive favorites to be chosen to hear cases in those areas of law—and this effect is stronger the more important the case is. There is no evidence of political factors playing a role—if anything, judges who agree with senior judges are less likely to be picked for important cases.","PeriodicalId":153506,"journal":{"name":"A Court of Specialists","volume":"150 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Panel Formation\",\"authors\":\"Chris Hanretty\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780197509234.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter looks at the identity of the judges chosen to hear each case. The Supreme Court is unlike other courts: it does not sit en banc, and the five-, seven-, or nine-judge panels are not chosen randomly, but are drawn up by court officials working together with senior judges. This chapter looks at explanations of how these panels are chosen. The key finding is that specialists in the relevant area of law are prohibitive favorites to be chosen to hear cases in those areas of law—and this effect is stronger the more important the case is. There is no evidence of political factors playing a role—if anything, judges who agree with senior judges are less likely to be picked for important cases.\",\"PeriodicalId\":153506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"A Court of Specialists\",\"volume\":\"150 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"A Court of Specialists\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197509234.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"A Court of Specialists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197509234.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章探讨被选来审理每个案件的法官的身份。最高法院与其他法院不同:它不是全院开庭,由5名、7名或9名法官组成的合议庭不是随机选择的,而是由法院官员与资深法官共同起草的。本章着眼于如何选择这些面板的解释。该研究的关键发现是,相关法律领域的专家在被选中审理这些法律领域的案件时,往往是令人难以接受的——而且案件越重要,这种影响就越强。没有证据表明政治因素在起作用——如果有的话,与资深法官意见一致的法官不太可能被选中审理重要案件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Panel Formation
This chapter looks at the identity of the judges chosen to hear each case. The Supreme Court is unlike other courts: it does not sit en banc, and the five-, seven-, or nine-judge panels are not chosen randomly, but are drawn up by court officials working together with senior judges. This chapter looks at explanations of how these panels are chosen. The key finding is that specialists in the relevant area of law are prohibitive favorites to be chosen to hear cases in those areas of law—and this effect is stronger the more important the case is. There is no evidence of political factors playing a role—if anything, judges who agree with senior judges are less likely to be picked for important cases.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信