C. K. Rowland

PRESIDENTIAL EFFECTS ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY IN THE LOWER FEDERAL COURTS: THE REAGAN JUDGES

Scholarly and media accounts have portrayed the Reagan administration as strongly committed to the selection of judges who are ideologically in tune with the president. Interviews with key congressional participants indicate that Reagan has received substantial home-state support for his ideological selection criteria. These findings lead to the prediction that Reagan judges on the lower federal courts will be substantially less supportive of criminal defendants than will Nixon or Carter appointees. Analysis of each appointment cohorts criminal justice decisions confirms this expectation for the district courts and courts of appeals. Indeed, the degree of polarization between the Reagan and Carter cohorts is unprecedented. However, this difference was due to the unexpectedly high support for criminal defendants exhibited by Carter appointees as well as the predicted low support provided by Reagan judges.

Judges' Policy Choices and the Value Basis of Judicial Appointments: A Comparison of Support for Criminal Defendants among Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy Appointees to the Federal District Courts

Using cases reported in the Federal Supplement, this study examines differences in support for criminal defendants among Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon appointees to the federal district courts. With controls for judicial era, region, and state, the research explores various legal and environmental constraints on presidential influences on the district judges. The findings lend support to value-based theories of judicial behavior, namely, that presidents do influence public policy through their judicial appointments. However, the results also reveal that the quantity and quality of presidential impact are shaped by numerous legal and extralegal factors, many of which are beyond the presidents control.

WOMEN'S RIGHTS BEFORE THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS, 1971-1977

This study analyzes opinions published by federal district judges in womens rights and racial minority discrimination cases in the period 1971-1977. Our analysis revealed that the petitioner in womens rights cases was only slightly more likely to be victorious than litigants from other disadvantaged groups. Using a regional variable, we found no significant differences between northern and southern judges deciding womens rights cases. However, the judges political party identification proved to be an important variable, and a meaningful split was found to exist between Democratic and Republican jurists in womens rights decisions.