The Many Faces of Strict Scrutiny: How the Supreme Court Changes the Rules in Race Cases

In this paper, we argue that there is no single test called strict scrutiny when the Court considers claims of racial discrimination. In fact, the Court changes the rules depending on why and how the government is using race. By examining racial redistricting, remedial affirmative action, and diversitybased affirmative action cases, we show how the Court uses at least three very different versions of strict scrutiny. The costs of maintaining the fiction of unitary strict scrutiny is high. In the area of racial profiling, for example, courts refuse to apply strict scrutiny for fear that it will either overly hamper police or will weaken strict scrutiny in other areas of racial discrimination. An open acknowledgment that the Court is already using different standards of analysis for different types of racial discrimination would allow courts to craft appropriate standards without fear of diminishing protections in other areas

The Suits That Counted: The Judicialization of Presidential Elections After Bush v. Gore

After the litigation of the 2000 presidential election are parties, candidates, and interest groups more likely to utilize pre-election litigation as a part of the normal election strategy? Our findings suggest this is the case, at least when a close election is anticipated. The difference in the political landscape and logic after the 2000 litigation is that the political players now perceive the judiciary as a venue of first rather than last recourse. Using data from all fifty states and the District of Columbia, we show that courts are seen as one of the primary arenas for challenging the rules of the game before the election and that litigation by parties is used in a coordinated strategic manner. The political lesson from the 2000 election litigation is that restorative litigation, an attempt to right a wrong or return something to the status quo ante, is more uncertain than preventative litigation, an attempt to alter the course of events before they have occurred. That is, pre-election litigation with potential for actually altering the outcome (preventative litigation) is a better strategy than post-election litigation that at some level seeks to change what has already occurred (restorative litigation). Note: At the time of writing, Christopher Shortell was affiliated with California State University, Northridge

Madame Justice Will Save Our Democracy: Gender Bias and Perceptions of the High Court in Transitional Regimes

While existing literature has established that women leaders are stereotyped as more likely to uphold the norms of democracy, the power of this effect in the non-democratic context is not established. We address this gap and argue that the context of regime transition cultivates a unique dynamic in which the stereotypes associated with women justices become especially valuable to both citizens and the state. However, we argue that this perception of women contributing to the health of democracy is not constant across all citizens equally; instead, those people with high levels of hostile bias against women are more likely to view women as the potential saviors of the democracy. To test our theories, we offer original survey data from Thailand and Poland, two countries in the midst of regime transition. We find evidence that suggests that the impact of women justices on assessments of democratic health is indeed dependent on hostile bias in Thailand, but that the relationship is not found in Poland. Our results suggest that bias can sometimes operate in unexpected ways, and that scholars should consider multiple measures of different types of bias when investigating its effects on behavior

What Can We Learn About Teaching Excellence from Our Students? Lessons From Six Years of Teaching Award Data

Teaching excellence in higher education can be defined and studied in different ways, but research efforts to date have often focused on institutional or instructor perspectives. This article uses a data set of over 500 open-ended comments submitted by Political Science undergraduates as part of a teaching award process to identify themes that matter most to students. We find that being supportive, bringing humor, enthusiasm, and passion to the classroom, and engaging students with relevant, challenging, and exciting activities are what defines teaching excellence from a student’s perspective. Building on these themes and using quotes to illustrate key concepts, we offer specific and concrete guidance to instructors about how to introduce these elements into their teaching

What Can We Learn About Teaching Excellence from Our Students? Lessons from Six Years of Teaching Award Data

Teaching excellence in higher education can be defined and studied in different ways, but research efforts to date have often focused on institutional or instructor perspectives. This article uses a data set of over 500 open-ended comments submitted by Political Science undergraduates as part of a teaching award process to identify themes that matter most to students. We find that being supportive, bringing humor, enthusiasm, and passion to the classroom, and engaging students with relevant, challenging, and exciting activities are what defines teaching excellence from a student’s perspective. Building on these themes and using quotes to illustrate key concepts, we offer specific and concrete guidance to instructors about how to introduce these elements into their teaching

Performance measures of the specialty referral process: a systematic review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Performance of specialty referrals is coming under scrutiny, but a lack of identifiable measures impedes measurement efforts. The objective of this study was to systematically review the literature to identify published measures that assess specialty referrals.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a systematic review of the literature for measures of specialty referral. Searches were made of MEDLINE and HealthSTAR databases, references of eligible papers, and citations provided by content experts. Measures were eligible if they were published from January 1973 to June 2009, reported on validity and/or reliability of the measure, and were applicable to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development healthcare systems. We classified measures according to a conceptual framework, which underwent content validation with an expert panel.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 2,964 potentially eligible papers. After abstract and full-text review, we selected 214 papers containing 244 measures. Most measures were applied in adults (57%), assessed structural elements of the referral process (60%), and collected data via survey (62%). Measures were classified into non-mutually exclusive domains: need for specialty care (N = 14), referral initiation (N = 73), entry into specialty care (N = 53), coordination (N = 60), referral type (N = 3), clinical tasks (N = 19), resource use (N = 13), quality (N = 57), and outcomes (N = 9).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Published measures are available to assess the specialty referral process, although some domains are limited. Because many of these measures have been not been extensively validated in general populations, assess limited aspects of the referral process, and require new data collection, their applicability and preference in assessment of the specialty referral process is needed.</p

Urban Politics and the Judiciary: Treating Courts as Endogenous

The study of urban politics often focuses on the ability of urban regimes to successfully pursue their interests and goals. However, scholars of urban politics only peripherally consider the role that courts play. And when courts are incorporated, they are treated as exogenous to the political system. This paper argues for the importance of treating the judiciary as endogenous to the local political system. Courts are themselves political institutions and should be understood as such in the study of politics at the local level. Doing so offers several benefits, including accounting for the ways in which state-level preferences operate as constraints on regimes (or are successfully resisted) and identifying federal regime influence on local politics. The paper identifies the relevant criteria that ought to be collected in order to treat courts as endogenous and offers two case studies of what this would look like in practice

Urban, State, and Federal Regimes in Local Politics: The Role of the Judiciary

The study of urban politics often focuses on the ability of urban regimes to successfully pursue their interests and goals. However, scholars of urban politics only peripherally consider the role that courts play. And when courts are incorporated, they are treated as exogenous to the political system. This paper argues for the importance of treating the judiciary as endogenous to the local political system. Courts are themselves political institutions and should be understood as such in the study of politics at the local level. Doing so offers several benefits, including accounting for the ways in which state-level preferences operate as constraints on regimes (or are successfully resisted) and identifying federal regime influence on local politics. The paper identifies the relevant criteria that ought to be collected in order to treat courts as endogenous and offers three case studies of what this would look like in practice

Reinvigorating Regime Politics

This paper seeks to reinvigorate the theory of regime politics in the judiciary among legal scholars, taking into account the critiques offered. The paper reviews the extant literature on regime politics, including its origins, before examining the criticisms this approach engendered. The valid concerns highlight the limited development of regime politics as a theory, despite the empirical work conducted in this tradition. This paper aims to address that shortcoming, explicitly identifying the underlying assumptions of regime politics theory and then developing testable hypotheses based on those assumptions