Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T14:24:49.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does Patronage Matter? Connecting Influences on Judicial Appointments with Judicial Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2014

Lori Hausegger ,
Troy Riddell  and
Matthew Hennigar
Lori Hausegger*
Affiliation:
Boise State University
Troy Riddell*
Affiliation:
University of Guelph
Matthew Hennigar*
Affiliation:
Brock University
*
Lori Hausegger, Department of Political Science, Boise State University, 1910 University Dr., Boise ID 83725-1935lorihausegger@boisestate.edu.
Troy Riddell, Department of Political Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON NIG 2W1riddell@uoguelph.ca.
Matthew Hennigar, Department of Political Science, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Ave., St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1matthew.hennigar@brocku.ca.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. The federal government's power to appoint judges has come under increased scrutiny in recent years. While many suggest that partisan affiliation, gender and professional background may be influencing the Canadian appointment process, and some have called into question the fairness of such influences, little attention has been directed at determining whether these characteristics influence the outcome of cases. This paper studies decisions made by the Ontario Court of Appeal between 1990 and 2003 and uses a unique measure of partisan affiliation in an attempt to answer the question: do characteristics which play a role in the appointment process influence judicial decision making.

Résumé. Ces dernières années ont vu une augmentation de l'attention donné à l'autorité du gouvernement fédéral en ce qui concerne la nomination judiciaire. Il y en a plusieurs qui suggèrent que l'affiliation partisan, le sexe, et l'expérience professionnelle des candidats judiciaires sont tous des caractéristiques qui peuvent influencer la procédure de nomination. Encore d'autres ont remis en question l'équité d'un choix basé sur ces influences. Cependant, la question qui n'a pas reçu beaucoup d'attention jusqu'à maintenant est si ces caractéristiques influencent le résultat des affaires juridiques. L'article qui suit examine les décisions rendu par le Cour d'appel de l'Ontario entre les années 1990 et 2003, employant une mesure unique d'affiliation partisan, avec le but de répondre à la question : Est-ce que les caractéristiques qui peuvent jouer un rôle dans la procédure de nomination influencent les décisions judiciaires?

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 665 - 690
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beiner, Theresa. M. 2002. “The Elusive (but Worthwhile) Quest for a Diverse Bench in the New Millennium.” University of California Davis Law Review 36: 597–617.Google Scholar
Blake, Donald. 1988. “Division and Cohesion: The Major Parties.” In Party Democracy in Canada: The Politics of National Party Conventions, ed. Perlin, George. Scarborough ON: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Boyd, Christina L., Epstein, Lee and Martin, Andrew D.. 2010. “Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging.” American Journal of Political Science 54: 389–411.Google Scholar
Cross, Frank B. 2007. Decision-Making in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Farhang, Sean and Wawro, Gregory. 2004. “Institutional Dynamics on U.S. Court of Appeals: Minority Representation under Panel Decision Making.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 20: 299–330.Google Scholar
Flemming, Roy B. 2004. Tournament of Appeals: Granting Judicial Review in Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Frank, James, Cullen, Francis T. and Cullen, John B.. 1987. “Sources of judicial attitudes toward criminal sanctioning.” American Journal of Criminal Justice 11: 151–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Hennigar, Matthew, Blais, Andre and Nevitte, Neil. 2005. “Explaining the Gender Gap in Support of the New Right: The Case of Canada.” Comparative Political Studies 38(10): 1171–95.Google Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Greene, Ian, Baar, Carl, McCormick, Peter, Szablowski, George and Thomas, Martin. 1998. Final Appeal: Decision Making in Canadian Courts of Appeal. Toronto: James Lorimar.Google Scholar
Hausegger, Lori, Riddell, Troy, Hennigar, Matthew and Richez, Emmanuelle. 2010. “Exploring the Links between Party and Appointment: Canadian Federal Judicial Appointments from 1989 to 2003.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 43: 633–59.Google Scholar
Johnson, Brian D. 2006. “The Multilevel Context of Criminal Sentencing: Integrating Judge- and County-level Influences.” Criminology 44: 259–98.Google Scholar
Johnson, Susan and Songer, Donald. 2009. “Judge Gender and the Voting Behavior of Justices on Two North American Supreme Court.” The Justice System Journal 30: 265–79.Google Scholar
Johnson, Susan, Songer, Donald and Jilani, Nadia. 2011. “Judge Gender, Critical Mass, and Decision Making in the Appellate Courts of Canada.” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 32: 237–60.Google Scholar
Johnston, Richard. 1988. “The Ideological Structure of Opinion on Policy.” In Party Democracy in Canada: The Politics of National Party Conventions, ed. Perlin, George. Scarborough ON: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Malleson, Kate. 2003. “Justifying Gender Equality on the Bench: Why Difference Won't Do.” Feminist Legal Studies 11: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massie, Tajuana, Johnson, Susan W. and Green, Sara Margaret. 2002. “The Impact of Gender and Race in the Decisions of Judges on the United States Courts of Appeal.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
McCormick, Peter. 1993. “Party Capability Theory and Appellate Success in the Supreme Court of Canada, 1949–1992.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 26: 523–40.Google Scholar
Meek, Jim. 1998. “Justice Heather Robertson: ‘Not Recommended.’” Halifax Chronicle-Herald, July 14, B1.Google Scholar
Ornstein, M.D. and Stevenson, H.M.. 1984. “Ideology and Public Policy in Canada.” British Journal of Political Science 14: 313–44.Google Scholar
Ostberg, C.L. and Wetstein, Matthew. 2007. Attitudinal Decision Making in the Supreme Court of Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Peresie, Jennifer L. 2005. “Female Judges Matter: Gender and Collegial Decision Making in the Federal Appellate Courts.” Research note. Yale Law Journal 114: 1759.Google Scholar
Riddell, Troy, Hausegger, Lori and Hennigar, Matthew. 2008. “Federal Judicial Appointments: A Look at Patronage in Federal Appointments since 1988.” University of Toronto Law Journal 58: 39–74.Google Scholar
Schmitz, Christin. 2005. “Federal Judges Often Liberal Donors, Survey Finds.” Ottawa Citizen, May 6, A5.Google Scholar
Schmitz, Christin. 2007. “Conservatives put more Crowns on the federal bench.” Lawyers Weekly, February 9.Google Scholar
Sisk, Gregory C., Heise, Michael and Morriss, Andrew P.. 1998. “Charter the Influences on the Judicial Mind: An Empirical Study of Judicial Reasoning.” New York University Law Review 73: 1377–1500.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Fletcher, Joseph, Russell, Peter, Tetlock, Philip and Prior, Markus. 2000. “The Theory of Democratic Elitism Revisited: A Response to Vengroff and Morton.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 33: 569–86.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R. 2008. The Transformation of the Supreme Court of Canada: An Empirical Examination. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., Davis, Sue and Haire, Susan. 1994. “A Reappraisal of Diversification in the Federal Courts: Gender Effects in the Courts of Appeals.” Journal of Politics 56: 425–39.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald, Sheehan, Reginald S. and Haire, Susan B.. 2000. Continuity and Change on the United States Courts of Appeals. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Stribopoulos, James and Yahya, Moin. 2007. “Does a Judge's Party of Appointment or Gender Matter to Case Outcomes? An Empirical Study of the Court of Appeal for Ontario.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 45: 315–64.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., Schkade, David and Ellman, Lisa Michelle. 2004. “Ideological Voting on Federal Courts of Appeals: A Preliminary Investigation.” Virginia Law Review 90: 301.Google Scholar
Tarr, G. Alan. 2014. Judicial Process and Judicial Policy Making. 6th ed. Boston: Cengage.Google Scholar
Young, Lisa and Cross, William. 2002. “Policy Attitudes of Party Members in Canada: Evidence of Ideological Politics.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 35: 859–80.Google Scholar