{"title":"《投票权法案》和由三名法官组成的地区法院小组的奇怪案件","authors":"Maxwell Mak, Andrew H. Sidman","doi":"10.1111/lapo.12186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A major avenue through which Voting Rights Act (VRA) cases are adjudicated is three-judge district court panels. These panels mix district and circuit court judges and exist in federal law to force certain important legal questions to be decided in a multimember environment. Using an original dataset of VRA cases decided by three-judge district court panels, we find that these panels do not operate as intended. We find that the circuit court judges on these panels vote their own preferences consistently, unmoved by strategic or collegial considerations. District court judges, on the other hand, appear to defer to their circuit court brethren.</p>","PeriodicalId":47050,"journal":{"name":"Law & Policy","volume":"44 2","pages":"185-203"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Voting Rights Act and the curious case of three-judge district court panels\",\"authors\":\"Maxwell Mak, Andrew H. Sidman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lapo.12186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>A major avenue through which Voting Rights Act (VRA) cases are adjudicated is three-judge district court panels. These panels mix district and circuit court judges and exist in federal law to force certain important legal questions to be decided in a multimember environment. Using an original dataset of VRA cases decided by three-judge district court panels, we find that these panels do not operate as intended. We find that the circuit court judges on these panels vote their own preferences consistently, unmoved by strategic or collegial considerations. District court judges, on the other hand, appear to defer to their circuit court brethren.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Policy\",\"volume\":\"44 2\",\"pages\":\"185-203\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lapo.12186\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lapo.12186","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Voting Rights Act and the curious case of three-judge district court panels
A major avenue through which Voting Rights Act (VRA) cases are adjudicated is three-judge district court panels. These panels mix district and circuit court judges and exist in federal law to force certain important legal questions to be decided in a multimember environment. Using an original dataset of VRA cases decided by three-judge district court panels, we find that these panels do not operate as intended. We find that the circuit court judges on these panels vote their own preferences consistently, unmoved by strategic or collegial considerations. District court judges, on the other hand, appear to defer to their circuit court brethren.
期刊介绍:
International and interdisciplinary in scope, Law & Policy embraces varied research methodologies that interrogate law, governance, and public policy worldwide. Law & Policy makes a vital contribution to the current dialogue on contemporary policy by publishing innovative, peer-reviewed articles on such critical topics as • government and self-regulation • health • environment • family • gender • taxation and finance • legal decision-making • criminal justice • human rights