Sheldon Goldman

Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals, 1961–1964 *

Voting behavior of public decision-makers has been of central concern for political scientists. For example, studies of legislatures (notably of Congress) have investigated such research problems as: (1) the extent to which voting on one issue is related to voting on other issues; (2) the potency of party affiliation as an organizer of attitudes and a predictor of voting behavior; and (3) the relationship of demographic characteristics to voting behavior. These and related concerns have more recently occupied the attention of students of the judiciary whose focus has primarily been on the United States Supreme Court. State courts of last resort have also provided a testing ground primarily for problems (2) and (3). However, the United States courts of appeals, second only to the Supreme Court in judicial importance, have been largely neglected. This paper considers the above research problems with reference to the voting behavior on all eleven courts of appeals from July 1, 1961 through June 30, 1964.

Backgrounds, Attitudes and the Voting Behavior of Judges: A Comment on Joel Grossman's Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decisions

SHELDON GOLDMAN University of Massackusetts T HE DIALOGUE WITHIN the profession concerning judicial behavior research has generally moved from disapproving polemic to sympathetic indeed constructive criticism. A recent valuable contribution to this dialogue was The Journal of Politics article by Joel B. Grossmanl in which he assessed three judicial decisionmaking models which either expressly or implicitly consider social/ political backgrounds insofar as they are at the root of attitudes and values as variables for judicial decision-making. Since I am responsible for one of the models, I would like to respond to Grossmans points of criticism and cite some evidence which supports ome of the assumptions questioned by Grossman. In so doing, the attempt shall be made to clarify the research problems at issue.

Judicial Selection and the Qualities that Make a “Good” Judge

This exploratory article considers various aspects of the linkage between the judicial selection and the recruitment of “good”—as defined here—judges and the challenge of determining and applying objective criteria to particular individuals. Certain selection procedures are suggested for maximizing the recruitment of good judges. The article examines five principal judicial selection methods used in the United States, with a focus on federal judicial selection and the changes brought about during the Carter administration. Although evaluation of judicial candidates will remain, for the most part, a subjective process, it may be possible to develop somewhat less subjective ways of assessing who does and does not possess the qualities that make for a good judge.

Johnson and Nixon Appointees to the Lower Federal Courts: Some Socio-political perspectives

It has been of some interest to students of federal judicial politics to examine the social and political characteristics of those who become judges and the recruitment patterns of different presidential administrations. The aim of this note is to present some findings relevant for such purposes and to focus on some socio-political characteristics of the Johnson and Nixon (through 1971) appointees to life-tenured positions on the United States district and appeals

Obama and the Federal Judiciary: Great Expectations but Will He Have a Dickens of a Time Living up to Them?

This essay speculates on what an Obama judiciary might look like and how the selection process is likely to play out. This is presented against the backdrop of past experience. First, the essay traces the demographic diversification of the federal bench from the presidencies of Franklin Roosevelt through George W. Bush. Second, this essay considers ideological diversity and presents voting data from the first three completed terms of the Roberts Court. Third, the essay considers the selection process, including confirmation of lower-court judges by the Senate. It concludes that President Obama can be expected to promote further gender, race, and ethnic diversification as well as to seek to moderate the current ideological imbalance on the courts. He will likely keep the existing institutional apparatus of judicial selection and will restore the American Bar Association to the role it had prior to George W. Bushs presidency. Confirmation may well prove to be a challenge in a Senate that is not filibuster-proof.

Obama’s Judicial Legacy: The Final Chapter

This article looks at the appointment and confirmation politics of President Obama’s nominees during the 114th Congress in which unprecedented obstruction and delay of Obamas nominees including the Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland occurred. This is placed within the overall context of Obama’s impact on the judiciary. The demographic portrait of the Obama judiciary is sketched with special attention to the historic record of diverse nontraditional appointees. We conclude with a look at what lies ahead with the Trump administration and judicial appointments/confirmation.

Writing the Book of Judges

This is part 1 of a two-part series detailing the selection and confirmation processes of lower federal court judges during President Obama’s first 6 years. Our attention in part 1 is on Obama’s lower federal court appointments during the 113th Congress, specifically on the selection processes. We then examine the backgrounds and attributes of those confirmed during the 113th, looking at the appointees to the district and appeals courts separately. Confirmation processes are the main focus of part 2 of our study, where we discuss the lead-up to the nuclear option, the “fallout” from its invocation, and the renewed emphasis on the Blue Slip system as a tool of the minority party in the Senate. We conclude by taking a deeper look at the administration’s historic contribution to enhancing diversity on the federal bench across the district and circuit courts and, as well, make a similar assessment of the impact of the Obama appointments on the partisan makeup of the federal bench on the district courts and across the appellate circuits.

Writing the Book of Judges: Part 2: Confirmation Politics in the 113th Congress

Building on the empirical portrait of federal judicial selection processes and outcomes in the 113th Congress published in part 1, we now turn to in-depth analyses, drawing on extensive interview data, of the confirmation battle over confirmations to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, filibuster reform (the nuclear option) and its consequences, the role of the blue slip system in contemporary judicial selection, case studies of selection successes and failures, and the historic impact of the Obama appointments record on patterns of diversity and partisanship on the federal bench.

Pursuit of Justices: Presidential Politics and the Selection of Supreme Court Nominees. By David Alistair Yalof. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999, 280p.

It is a pleasure to review this well-written book, which should be of enormous interest to every serious student of judicial politics and the presidency. Based upon a thorough mining of the presidential papers of seven presidents and numerous interviews with key participants in the selection process, along with other primary and secondary sources, Yalof gives us a presidency-by-presidency take on the recruitment of Supreme Court nominees.