NCJ Number
48278
Journal
Justice System Journal Volume: 3 Issue: 3 Dated: (SPRING 1978) Pages: 208-219
Date Published
1978
Length
12 pages
Annotation
MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS AFFECTING LOWER-COURT JUDGES' LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ARE IDENTIFIED AND DISCUSSED.
Abstract
A REVIEW OF THE STUDIES CONDUCTED IN THE SUBJECT AREA OF LOWER-COURT IMPLEMENTATION OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS REVEALED THAT LOWER-COURT JUDGES GENERALLY TEND TO RESIST INCORPORATING SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS WITH WHICH THEY HAVE STRONG DISAGREEMENT INTO THEIR OWN DECISIONS. THE WARREN COURT'S RULINGS IN THE AREAS OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE WERE THE FOCAL POINTS OF THE MAJORITY OF THESE STUDIES. ASSUMING THAT A SUPREME COURT POLICY IS CLEARLY STATED AND EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATED TO LOWER-COURT JUDGES, WHAT ARE THE FACTORS THAT WILL DETERMINE A JUDGE'S WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT THAT POLICY? THE AUTHOR SOUGHT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION THROUGH INTERVIEWS WITH FEDERAL JUDGES AND SELECTIVE STUDY OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. JUDGES' RESPONSES TO SUPREME COURT POLICIES ARE VIEWED AS RELATED TO FOUR MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS. TWO OF THESE FACTORS, A JUDGE'S CONDITIONED PREDISPOSITION TO ACCEPT THE COURT'S AUTHORITY AND THE SANCTION OF REVERSAL FOR FAILURE TO INCORPORATE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS INTO SPECIFIC TRIAL DECISIONS, ARE CONSIDERED TO SPUR JUDGES TO ADOPT SUPREME COURT POLICY. TWO OTHER FACTORS, A JUDGE'S PERSONAL POLICY PREFERENCES AND INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS, COULD LEAD TO RESISTANCE TO SUPREME COURT POLICY WHERE A JUDGE'S OUTLOOK AND SUBJECTIVE INTERESTS ARE IN CONFLICT WITH A PARTICULAR SUPREME COURT DECISION. THE SUPREME COURT SCHOOL DESEGREGATION RULING IS CITED AS AN EXAMPLE OF SUCH A CONDITION, WHERE SOUTHERN JUDGES, RATHER THAN RISK CONDEMNATION AND ALIENATION WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITIES, ACTED TO CIRCUMVENT COURT POLICY. CIRCUMSTANCES THAT CAUSE HIGH PROPORTIONS OF JUDGES TO REJECT SUPREME COURT POLICY ARE CONSIDERED THE EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE GENERAL PATTERN; HOWEVER, IT IS BELIEVED THE POLICIES THAT DO ELICIT WIDESPREAD NONADOPTION ARE LIKELY TO BE HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT. IT IS NOTED THAT THE GENERAL EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SUPREME COURT IN IMPLEMENTING ITS POLICIES THROUGHOUT THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM CANNOT BE DETERMINED WITHOUT A MUCH BROADER BASE OF EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO LOWER-COURT RESPONSE TO ITS DECISIONS. REFERENCE NOTES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)