衡量机关行为司法审查的立法设计

Pamela J Clouser McCann, Charles R Shipan, Yuhua Wang
{"title":"衡量机关行为司法审查的立法设计","authors":"Pamela J Clouser McCann, Charles R Shipan, Yuhua Wang","doi":"10.1093/jleo/ewab031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When Congress writes and passes statutes, it can include detailed provisions designating how judicial review of agency actions will operate. Yet despite their importance, empirical research has suffered from a lack of a systematic measure or assessment of these review provisions. In this project, we create a new measure of exposure to judicial review by hand-coding judicial review provisions in the text of significant legislation from 1947 to 2016. We identify five categories of review provisions, including language that describes the reviewability of agency decisions, time limits for petitioning courts, the scope of review, court venue, and standing. Utilizing these attributes, we construct latent indexes of exposure to the judiciary, including law-specific and agency-specific versions of these indexes. We then examine the validity of these measures of agency exposure to judicial review by assessing their covariation with litigation, discretion, and independence. Our data create possibilities for future research on how Congress can strategically attempt to influence other branches as well as insight into interactions among the branches in a separation-of-powers system.","PeriodicalId":501404,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization","volume":"61 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring the Legislative Design of Judicial Review of Agency Actions\",\"authors\":\"Pamela J Clouser McCann, Charles R Shipan, Yuhua Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jleo/ewab031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When Congress writes and passes statutes, it can include detailed provisions designating how judicial review of agency actions will operate. Yet despite their importance, empirical research has suffered from a lack of a systematic measure or assessment of these review provisions. In this project, we create a new measure of exposure to judicial review by hand-coding judicial review provisions in the text of significant legislation from 1947 to 2016. We identify five categories of review provisions, including language that describes the reviewability of agency decisions, time limits for petitioning courts, the scope of review, court venue, and standing. Utilizing these attributes, we construct latent indexes of exposure to the judiciary, including law-specific and agency-specific versions of these indexes. We then examine the validity of these measures of agency exposure to judicial review by assessing their covariation with litigation, discretion, and independence. Our data create possibilities for future research on how Congress can strategically attempt to influence other branches as well as insight into interactions among the branches in a separation-of-powers system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization\",\"volume\":\"61 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewab031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewab031","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

当国会编写和通过法规时,它可以包括详细的条款,指定如何对机构的行为进行司法审查。然而,尽管它们很重要,但由于缺乏对这些审查规定的系统衡量或评估,实证研究受到了影响。在本项目中,我们通过在1947年至2016年的重要立法文本中手工编码司法审查条款,创建了一种新的司法审查暴露措施。我们确定了五类审查条款,包括描述机关决定的可审查性的语言、请愿法院的时间限制、审查范围、法院地点和诉讼时效。利用这些属性,我们构建了潜在的司法暴露指数,包括这些指数的法律特定版本和机构特定版本。然后,我们通过评估其与诉讼、自由裁量权和独立性的共变来检验这些机构暴露于司法审查的措施的有效性。我们的数据为未来研究国会如何在战略上试图影响其他部门以及洞察三权分立系统中各部门之间的相互作用创造了可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measuring the Legislative Design of Judicial Review of Agency Actions
When Congress writes and passes statutes, it can include detailed provisions designating how judicial review of agency actions will operate. Yet despite their importance, empirical research has suffered from a lack of a systematic measure or assessment of these review provisions. In this project, we create a new measure of exposure to judicial review by hand-coding judicial review provisions in the text of significant legislation from 1947 to 2016. We identify five categories of review provisions, including language that describes the reviewability of agency decisions, time limits for petitioning courts, the scope of review, court venue, and standing. Utilizing these attributes, we construct latent indexes of exposure to the judiciary, including law-specific and agency-specific versions of these indexes. We then examine the validity of these measures of agency exposure to judicial review by assessing their covariation with litigation, discretion, and independence. Our data create possibilities for future research on how Congress can strategically attempt to influence other branches as well as insight into interactions among the branches in a separation-of-powers system.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信