Liberal Justices\u27 Reliance on Legislative History

This Article presents a strong case against the conventional wisdom that legislative history is a politicized\u27 resource, invoked opportunistically by federal judges. The premise that judges regularly rely on legislative history to promote their preferred policy positions-if true-should find ample support in the majority opinions of liberal Supreme Court Justices construing liberal (pro-employee) labor and civil rights statutes. By analyzing all 320-plus majority opinions in workplace law authored by eight liberal Justices from 1969-2006, the authors establish that legislative history reliance is actually associated with a constraining set of results. When the eight liberal Justices use legislative history as part of their majority reasoning, they do so to justify a higher proportion of their pro-employer outcomes than their pro-employee decisions. The authors explain how liberal Justices use legislative history to illuminate the contours of complex statutory bargains that often favor conservative or pro-employer positions. After considering alternative explanations, the authors conclude that Justices Brennan, Marshall, Souter, Stevens, and others are willing to follow so frequently a legislative history trail leading away from their presumed ideological preferences mainly because they have invoked this interpretive resource in principled fashion. The Article also describes how, in the face of Justice Scalia\u27s fervent opposition to legislative history, liberal Justices since 1986 have opted not to rely on that resource in a series of pro-employer majorities that Scalia joins. One result of the liberals\u27 strategic restraint is that their use of legislative history in the remaining (mostly pro-employee) majority opinions appears more ideological than it was before Scalia joined the Court. Intriguingly, Justice Scalia\u27s strong resistance to legislative history when used by liberal Justices does not extend to majorities authored by his conservative colleagues. Scalia seems prepared to give these conservative colleagues more of a free ride: he is as likely to join their majorities, or vote for their results, when they rely on legislative history as when they do not

Leading Digit Laws on Linear Lie Groups

We determine the leading digit laws for the matrix components of a linear Lie group $G$. These laws generalize the observations that the normalized Haar measure of the Lie group $\mathbb{R}^+$ is $dx/x$ and that the scale invariance of $dx/x$ implies the distribution of the digits follow Benford's law, which is the probability of observing a significand base $B$ of at most $s$ is $\log_B(s)$; thus the first digit is $d$ with probability $\log_B(1 + 1/d)$). Viewing this scale invariance as left invariance of Haar measure, we determine the power laws in significands from one matrix component of various such $G$. We also determine the leading digit distribution of a fixed number of components of a unit sphere, and find periodic behavior when the dimension of the sphere tends to infinity in a certain progression.Comment: Version 1.0, 17 pages, 1 figur

Liberal Justices\u27 Reliance on Legislative History

This Article presents a strong case against the conventional wisdom that legislative history is a politicized\u27 resource, invoked opportunistically by federal judges. The premise that judges regularly rely on legislative history to promote their preferred policy positions-if true-should find ample support in the majority opinions of liberal Supreme Court Justices construing liberal (pro-employee) labor and civil rights statutes. By analyzing all 320-plus majority opinions in workplace law authored by eight liberal Justices from 1969-2006, the authors establish that legislative history reliance is actually associated with a constraining set of results. When the eight liberal Justices use legislative history as part of their majority reasoning, they do so to justify a higher proportion of their pro-employer outcomes than their pro-employee decisions. The authors explain how liberal Justices use legislative history to illuminate the contours of complex statutory bargains that often favor conservative or pro-employer positions. After considering alternative explanations, the authors conclude that Justices Brennan, Marshall, Souter, Stevens, and others are willing to follow so frequently a legislative history trail leading away from their presumed ideological preferences mainly because they have invoked this interpretive resource in principled fashion. The Article also describes how, in the face of Justice Scalia\u27s fervent opposition to legislative history, liberal Justices since 1986 have opted not to rely on that resource in a series of pro-employer majorities that Scalia joins. One result of the liberals\u27 strategic restraint is that their use of legislative history in the remaining (mostly pro-employee) majority opinions appears more ideological than it was before Scalia joined the Court. Intriguingly, Justice Scalia\u27s strong resistance to legislative history when used by liberal Justices does not extend to majorities authored by his conservative colleagues. Scalia seems prepared to give these conservative colleagues more of a free ride: he is as likely to join their majorities, or vote for their results, when they rely on legislative history as when they do not

Optimal scheduling for refueling multiple autonomous aerial vehicles

The scheduling, for autonomous refueling, of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is posed as a combinatorial optimization problem. An efficient dynamic programming (DP) algorithm is introduced for finding the optimal initial refueling sequence. The optimal sequence needs to be recalculated when conditions change, such as when UAVs join or leave the queue unexpectedly. We develop a systematic shuffle scheme to reconfigure the UAV sequence using the least amount of shuffle steps. A similarity metric over UAV sequences is introduced to quantify the reconfiguration effort which is treated as an additional cost and is integrated into the DP algorithm. Feasibility and limitations of this novel approach are also discussed

An International Comparison of the Effects of Government Agricultural Support on Food Budget Shares

This study evaluates econometrically the effect of government support to agriculture on a measure of the affordability of food in 10 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. The panel model we construct specifically utilizes two values calculated by the OECD: Producer Support Estimates as a percentage of gross farm receipts and the Consumer Nominal Protection Coefficient. These two variables represent transfers from taxpayers to agricultural producers through government programs and transfers from consumers to government through protectionist measures, respectively. By using dummy variables, we find implications for groups of countries on the basis of their relative levels of support and protection.agricultural policy, obesity, Agribusiness, Agricultural and Food Policy, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, I18, Q18,

Incentives Matter: Assessing Biofuel Policies in the South

As a result of the increase in the real cost of fossil fuel-based energy in recent years, federal and state governments have taken a more active role in energy policy by creating incentives to develop alternative sources of energy, including biofuels. However, policymakers often become focused on the specific type of energy and not the energy services consumers ultimately value. The lack of recognition of energy as a commodity results in policies that ignore the characteristics of the associated markets: easy entry and exit, no barriers to entry, and sensitivity to changes in supply and demand. Consequently, energy industries may fail to arise because entrepreneurs must be able to account for all costs and earn—at a minimum—a competitive return on the investment. This article evaluates the options available to policymakers related to biofuels, which are of particular concern to the South, and includes an assessment of the knowledge base on which policy decisions are made.alternative energy, biofuels, energy policy, Resource /Energy Economics and Policy, Q41, Q42, Q48,