Styles of Argumentation in Judicial Opinions (Legitimating Judicial Decisions)

Literature Cited

1. Altman S 1990. Beyond candor. Mich. Law Rev. 89:296–351
   [Google Scholar]
2. Audette AP, Weaver CL 2015. Faith in the court: religious out‐groups and the perceived legitimacy of judicial decisions. Law Soc. Rev. 49:999–1022
   [Google Scholar]
3. Badas A 2016. The public's motivated response to Supreme Court decision-making. Justice Syst. J. 37:318–30
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baird VA 2001. Building institutional legitimacy: the role of procedural justice. Political Res. Q. 54:333–54
   [Google Scholar]
5. Baird VA, Gangl A 2006. Shattering the myth of legality: the impact of the media's framing of Supreme Court procedures on perceptions of fairness. Political Psychol 27:597–614
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bartels BL, Johnston CD 2013. On the ideological foundations of Supreme Court legitimacy in the American public. Am. J. Political Sci. 57:184–99
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bonneau CW, Kelly JT, Pronin K, Redman SM, Zarit M 2017. Evaluating the effects of multiple opinion rationales on Supreme Court legitimacy. Am. Political Res. 45:335–65
   [Google Scholar]
8. Buhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD 2011. Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6:3–5
   [Google Scholar]
9. Caldeira GA, Gibson JL 1992. The etiology of public support for the Supreme Court. Am. J. Political Sci. 36:635–64
   [Google Scholar]
10. Chemerinsky E 2002. The rhetoric of constitutional law. Mich. Law Rev. 100:2008–35
    [Google Scholar]
11. Clapper v. Amnesty International USA 568 U.S 398 2013.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Coe K, Tewksbury D, Bond BJ, Drogos KL, Porter RW et al. 2008. Hostile news: partisan use and perceptions of cable news programming. J. Commun. 58:201–19
    [Google Scholar]
13. DeVellis RF 2016. Scale Development: Theory and Applications Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
14. Dworkin R 1986. Law's Empire Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
15. Epstein L 2015. Some thoughts on the study of judicial behavior. William Mary Law Rev 57:2017–74
    [Google Scholar]
16. Eskridge WN, Frickey PP 1994. Commentary: The making of The Legal Process. Harvard Law Rev 107:2031–55
    [Google Scholar]
17. Farganis D 2012. Do reasons matter? The impact of opinion content on Supreme Court legitimacy. Political Res. Q. 65:206–16
    [Google Scholar]
18. Ferguson RA 1990. The judicial opinion as literary genre. Yale J. Law Humanit. 2:201–20
    [Google Scholar]
19. Fried C 1999. Scholars and judges: reason and power. Harvard J. Law Public Policy 23:807–32
    [Google Scholar]
20. Fuller LL 1978. The forms and limits of adjudication. Harvard Law Rev 92:353–409
    [Google Scholar]
21. Gallup. 2017. U.S. Supreme Court job approval rating ties record low. Gallup Politics July 29. http://www.gallup.com/poll/194057/supreme-court-job-approval-rating-ties-record-low.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
22. Gewirtz P 1996. On “I Know It When I See It.”. Yale Law J 105:1023–42
    [Google Scholar]
23. Gibson JL 2015. Legitimacy is for losers: the interconnections of institutional legitimacy, performance evaluations, and the symbols of judicial authority. Motivating Cooperation and Compliance with Authority B Bornstein, A Tomkins 81–116 Cham, Switz: Springer Int. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Gibson JL, Caldeira GA 2011. Has legal realism damaged the legitimacy of the US Supreme Court?. Law Soc. Rev. 45:195–219
    [Google Scholar]
25. Gibson JL, Caldeira GA, Spence LK 2003. Measuring attitudes toward the United States Supreme Court. Am. J. Political Sci. 47:354–67
    [Google Scholar]
26. Gibson JL, Nelson MJ 2014. The legitimacy of the US Supreme Court: conventional wisdoms and recent challenges thereto. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 10:201–19
    [Google Scholar]
27. Gibson JL, Nelson MJ 2016. Change in institutional support for the US Supreme Court: Is the Court's legitimacy imperiled by the decisions it makes?. Public Opinion Q 80:622–41
    [Google Scholar]
28. Gibson JL, Nelson MJ 2017. Reconsidering positivity theory: What roles do politicization, ideological disagreement, and legal realism play in shaping US Supreme Court legitimacy?. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 14:592–617
    [Google Scholar]
29. Haider-Markel DP, Allen MD, Johansen M 2006. Understanding variations in media coverage of US Supreme Court decisions: comparing media outlets in their coverage of Lawrence v. Texas. Harvard Int. J. Press Politics 11:64–85
    [Google Scholar]
30. Hansford TG, Intawan C, Nicholson SP 2018. Snap judgment: implicit perceptions of a (political) court. Political Behav 40:127–47
    [Google Scholar]
31. Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ 2004. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ. Res. 33:14–26
    [Google Scholar]
32. Kahan DM 2011. The Supreme Court 2010 term—foreword: neutral principles, motivated cognition, and some problems for constitutional law. Harvard Law Rev 125:1–78
    [Google Scholar]
33. Kahan DM 2012. The aporetic judge. Cultural Cognition Project Blog Oct 2. http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2012/10/2/the-aporetic-judge.html
    [Google Scholar]
34. Klein D 2015. The normative element of legitimacy. Making Law and Courts Research Relevant BL Bartels, CW Bonneau 157–69 New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
35. Knowles HJ, Lichtman SB, Metroka BT 2017. The US Supreme Court in the Obama years. The Obama Presidency and the Politics of Change: Studies of the Americas E Ashbee, J Dumbrell 79–97 Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
36. Leflar RA 1961. Some observations concerning judicial opinions. Columbia Law Rev 61:810–20
    [Google Scholar]
37. Loken E, Gelman A 2017. Measurement error and the replication crisis. Science 6325:584–85
    [Google Scholar]
38. Maxwell SE, Lau MY, Howard GS 2015. Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean?. Am. Psychol. 70:487–98
    [Google Scholar]
39. National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius 567 U.S 519 2012.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Nicholson SP, Hansford TG 2014. Partisans in robes: party cues and public acceptance of Supreme Court decisions. Am. J. Political Sci. 58:620–36
    [Google Scholar]
41. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey 505 U.S 833 1992.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Posner RA 1988. The jurisprudence of skepticism. Mich. Law Rev. 86:827–91
    [Google Scholar]
43. Posner RA 1993. The Problems of Jurisprudence Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
44. Posner RA 1995. Judges’ writing styles (and do they matter?). Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 62:1421–49
    [Google Scholar]
45. Ramirez MD 2008. Procedural perceptions and support for the US Supreme Court. Political Psychol 29:675–98
    [Google Scholar]
46. Ratzlaf v. United States 510 U.S 135 1994.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Robinson RR 2014. It's how you say it: ameliorating motivated reactions to judicial rulings using aporetic reasoning. SSRN Aug. 16. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2431009
    [Google Scholar]
48. Rosenthal JS, Yoon AH 2011. Detecting multiple authorship of United States Supreme Court legal decisions using function words. Ann. Appl. Stat. 5:283–308
    [Google Scholar]
49. Schacter JS 2016. Obergefell's audiences. Ohio St. Law J. 77:1011–37
    [Google Scholar]
50. Schauer F 1995. Giving reasons. Stanford Law Rev 47:633–59
    [Google Scholar]
51. Shapiro M 1992. The giving reasons requirement. Univ. Chicago Legal Forum 1992:179–220
    [Google Scholar]
52. Simon D 1998. A psychological model of judicial decision making. Rutgers Law J 30:1–142
    [Google Scholar]
53. Simon D, Scurich N 2011. Lay judgments of judicial decision-making. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 8:709–27
    [Google Scholar]
54. Simon D, Scurich N 2013.a Judicial overstating. Chicago Kent Law Rev 88:411–31
    [Google Scholar]
55. Simon D, Scurich N 2013.b The effect of legal expert commentary on lay judgments of judicial decision making. J. Empir. Legal Stud. 10:799–816
    [Google Scholar]
56. Singer JW 1988. Legal realism now. Calif. Law Rev. 76:465–503
    [Google Scholar]
57. Spill RL, Oxley ZM 2003. Philosopher kings or political actors—how the media portray the Supreme Court. Judicature 87:22–29
    [Google Scholar]
58. Sunstein CR 2007. Republic.com 2.0 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
59. Tolk D 1995. Ratzlafv. United States: Willful violation of antistructuring law requires knowledge that conduct is unlawful. J. Contemp. Law 21:135–44
    [Google Scholar]
60. Tushnet M 1994. Style and the Supreme Court's educational role in government. Const. Comment. 11:215–25
    [Google Scholar]
61. Tyler TR 2006. Why People Obey the Law Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
62. Tyler TR, Krochik M 2013. Deference to authority as a basis for managing ideological conflict. Chicago Kent Law Rev 88:433–54
    [Google Scholar]
63. Tyler TR, Mitchell G 1994. Legitimacy and the empowerment of discretionary legal authority: the United States Supreme Court and abortion rights. Duke Law J 43:735–65
    [Google Scholar]
64. United States v. Morris 977 F. 2d 617 (DC Cir 1992.
    [Google Scholar]
65. Wald PM 1995. The rhetoric of results and the results of rhetoric: judicial writings. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 62:1371–419
    [Google Scholar]
66. Wechsler H 1959. Toward neutral principles of constitutional law. Harvard Law Rev 73:1–35
    [Google Scholar]
67. Weinstein JB 2014. The dialogue. Blindfolds Off: Judges on How They Decide Cases J Cohen 284–94 Chicago: Am. Bar Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Wells M 1994. French and American judicial opinions. Yale J. Int. Law 19:81–133
    [Google Scholar]
69. White GE 1973. The evolution of reasoned elaboration: jurisprudential criticism and social change. Va. Law Rev. 59:279–302
    [Google Scholar]
70. White JB 1995. What's an opinion for. Univ. Chicago Law. Rev. 62:1363–69
    [Google Scholar]
71. Wilentz RN 1984. Judicial legitimacy—finding the law. Seton Hall Legis. J. 8:221–47
    [Google Scholar]