Historical Consensual Norms in the High Court

There is a substantial political-science literature that discusses the notion of consensual norms in the US Supreme Court. Most of this literature assumes that consensual norms exist, rather than proving their existence. Caldeira and Zorn ( American Journal of Political Science 42: 874-902, 1998) use the method of cointegration developed in econometric time-series analysis to prove the existence of a single consensual norm in the US Supreme Court. This study applies cointegration analysis to historical time-series data on dissenting and single judgments to examine whether there is a single consensual norm in the High Court of Australia. The study finds that a single consensual norm does not underlie decision making in the High Court. This result is explained on the basis that the institutions underpinning decision making and the approach to decision making are different between the Australian High Court and the US Supreme Court.     

志书中的明代宦官史料

在明代,一些地方志的修纂与宦官有密切的联系。同时,明代地方志中存有大量明朝宦官史料,对于研究明代宦官以及宦官在地方管理制度中的角色及影响都具有重要价值。     

The Other Supreme Court

相似文献   

The Supreme Court and Juvenile Justice

For so many things I thank the Historical Society profoundly, but place right at the top of my list the delightful opportunity your invitation has given me to read the prior Annual Lectures—interesting, exciting, thoroughly intimidating—touching on the Court's history, its cases, its people, even its wives (the subject of Justice Ginsburg's 1999 lecture). Wholly apart from the Society's many initiatives to preserve the Court's history and increase public awareness of its contributions to our nation, the now nearly three dozen Annual Lectures alone offer an amazing insight into this great institution.     

云南地方的古代历史记载与史学

汉晋至元代是云南古代地方史学发展的早期阶段 ,其中汉晋时期是云南史学的萌起时期 ,开始出现了专门记载云南地方历史的、带有方志特点的史著 ;南诏大理国时期 (即唐宋时期 )为云南史学发展的关键时期 ,地方志史书的编撰趋于成熟 ,史籍体例日趋丰富 ,信史特征更加明显。元代为云南古代早期史学的成熟期 ,云南地方史学的编撰直追中原内地的发展水平。而且云南古代史学发展从一个侧面体现了云南地方文化与中原文化交流和融合     

A New Right to Property: Civil War Confiscation in the Reconstruction Supreme Court

During the Civil War, both the Union Congress and the Confederate Congress put in place sweeping confiscation programs designed to seize the private property of enemy citizens on a massive scale. Meeting in special session in August 1861, the U.S. Congress passed the First Confiscation Act, authorizing the federal government to seize the property of those participating directly in the rebellion. ¹ The Confederate Congress retaliated on August 30, 1861, passing the Sequestration Act. ² This law authorized the Confederate government to forever seize the real and personal property of "alien enemies," a term that included every U.S. citizen and all those living in the Confederacy who remained loyal to the Union.     

Many Voices,One Court: The Origin and Role of Dissent in the Supreme Court

E pluribus unum—out of many, one—is the phrase emblazoned on the Seal of the United States, which refers to the notion that a single American voice emerges from the many diverse groups that constitute the nation. The legislative and executive branches of government often act as one voice through legislative bills and executive acts, aggregating diverse interests that reflect the national will. The notion of e pluribus unum, however, is not often applied to the judiciary, a branch of government the members of which are viewed, not as outlets for the will of the people, but as gatekeepers of the rule of law. But while the Supreme Court may not speak directly for the people, its opinions speak to the people, and the methods used by the Justices to express those opinions have revealed changes in the conception of the Court's voice throughout history.