Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T11:48:47.912Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What's Law Got to Do with It? Judicial Behavioralists Test the “Legal Model” of Judicial Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Howard Gillman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Essay
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , Spring 2001 , pp. 465 - 504
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2001 

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

Adamany, David. 1991. The Supreme Court. In The American Courts: A Critical Assessment, ed. John Gates, B. and Charles Johnson, A., 5–33. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Alexander, Larry. 1989. Constrained by Precedent. Southern California Law Review 63:1–64.Google Scholar
Banks, Christopher P. 1999. Reversals of Precedent and Judicial Policy-Making: How Judicial Conceptions of Stare Decisis in the U.S. Supreme Court Influence Social Change. Akron Law Review 32:233.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence. 1993. Case Selection and Decision Making in the U.S. Supreme Court. Law and Society Review 21:443–59.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence 1994a. What Judges Want: Judges' Goals and Judicial Behavior. Political Research Quurterly 47:749–68.Google Scholar
Baum, Lawrence 1994b. Symposium: The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Law and Courts 4:3–5.Google Scholar
Bobbitt, Philip. 1991. Constitutional Interpretation. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bohman, James F. 1991. New Philosophy of Social Science. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Breyer, Stephen G. 1998. The Work of the Supreme Court. American Academy of Arts and Science, Sept.-Oct., 47.Google Scholar
Brigham, John. 1978. Constitutional Language: An Interpretation of Judicial Decisions. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Brigham, John 1987. Rights, Rage, and Remedy: Farms of Law in Political Discourse. Studies in American Political Development 2:303–17.Google Scholar
Brown, Ray A. 1926. Review of The Supreme Court and Minimum Wage Legislation, by National Consumer's League. Harvard Law Review 39:909–12.Google Scholar
Burton, Steven J. 1992. Judging in Good Faith. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bussiere, Elizabeth. 1994. The Failure of Constitutional Welfare Rights in the Warren Court. Political Science Quarterly 109:105–31.Google Scholar
Bussiere, Elizabeth 1997. (Dis) Entitling the Poor: The Warren Court, Welfare Rights, and the American Political Tradition. University Park: Pennsylvania State Press.Google Scholar
Caldeira, Gregory A. 1994. Review of The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, by Jeffrey A. Segal and Harold J. Spaeth. American Political Science Review 88:485–86.Google Scholar
Caminker, Evan. 1994. Why Must Inferior Courts Obey Supreme Court Precedents Stanford Law Review 46:816–73.Google Scholar
Carp, Robert A., and Stidham, Ronald. 1996. The Judicial Process in America. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Cardozo, Benjamin N. 1921. The Nature of the Judicial Process. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Clayton, Cornell W., and Gillman, Howard, eds. 1999. Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Felix S. 1935. Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach. Columbia Law Review 35:809–49. Excerpt reproduced in Fisher et al. 1993.Google Scholar
Cross, Frank B. 1997. Political Science and the New Legal Realism: A Case of Unfortunate Interdisciplinary Ignorance. Northwestern University Law Review 92:251–327.Google Scholar
Cross, Frank B. and Emerson Tiller, H. 1998. Judicial Partisanship and Obedience to Legal Doctrine: Whistleblowing on the Federal Courts of Appeal. Yale Law Journal 107:2155–76.Google Scholar
Cushman, Barry. 1998. Rethinking the New Deal Court: The Structure of a Constitutional Revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Danelski, David J. 1966. Values as Variables in Judicial Decision-Making: Notes toward a Theory. Vanderbilt Law Review 19:721–40.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1924. Logical Method and Law. Cornell Law Quarterly 10:17–27.Google Scholar
Duxbury, Neil. 1995. Patterns of American Jurisprudence. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 1978. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald 1985. A Matter of Principle. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald 1986. Law's Empire. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald 1991. Pragmatism, Right Answers, and True Banality. In Pragmatism in Law and Society, ed. Brint, Michael and Weaver, William, 359–88. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald 1996. Freedom's Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, Harry T. 1985. Public Misperceptions Concerning the “Politics” of Judging: Dispelling Some Myths about the D.C. Circuit. University of Colorado Law Review 56:619.Google Scholar
Edwards, Harry T. 1998. Collegiality and Decision Making on the D.C. Circuit. Virginia Law Review 84:1335–70.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee. 1999. The Comparative Advantage. Law and Courts 9:1–6.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee 2000. Social Science, the Courts, and the Law. Judicature 83:224–27.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Joseph Kobylka, F. 1992. The Supreme Court and Legal Change: Abortion and the Death Penalty. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Mershon, Carol. 1996. Measuring Political Preferences. American Journal of Political Science 40:261–94.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. 1990. The Next Textualism. UCLA Law Review 37:621–91.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. 1989. Doing What Comes Naturally: Change, Rhetoric, and the Practice of Theory in Literary and Legal Studies. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley 1994. There's No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It's a Good Thing, Too. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Franklin M. 1958. The Mathematical Analysis of Supreme Court Decisions: The Use and Abuse of Quantitative Methods. American Political Science Review 52:321–38.Google Scholar
Fisher, William W. III, Morton, Horwitz J., and Thomas, Reed A., eds. 1993. American Legal Realism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
George, Tracey E. 1998. Development of a Positive Theory of Decisionmaking on U.S. Courts of Appeals. Ohio State Law Journal 58:1635–96.Google Scholar
George, Tracey E., and Epstein, Lee. 1992. On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making. American Political Science Review 86: 323–37.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1986. The Social Science of Judicial Politics. In Political Science: The Science of Politics, ed. Herbert Weisberg, F., 141–66. New York: Agathon Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1991. Decision Making in Appellate Courts. In The American Courts: A Critical Assessment, ed. John Gates, B. and Charles Johnson, A., 255–78. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard. 1993. The Constitution Besieged: The Rise and Demise of Lochner Era Police Powers Jurisprudence. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard 1996. More on the Origins of the Fuller Court's Jurisprudence: Reexamining the Scope of Federal Power over Commerce and Manufacturing in Nineteenth-Century Constitutional Law. Political Research Quarterly 49:415–37.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard 1997. The Collapse of Constitutional Originalism and the Rise of the Notion of the “Living Constitution” in the Course of American State-Building. Studies in American Political Development 11:191–247.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard 1999. The Court as an Idea, Not a Building (or a Game): Interpretive Institutionalism and the Analysis of Supreme Court Decision-Making. In Clayton and Gillman 1999.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard 2001 (forthcoming). The Votes that Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gillman, Howard, and Clayton, Cornell, eds. 1999. The Supreme Court in American Politics: New Institutionalist Interpretations. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Graber, Mark A. 1991. Transforming Free Speech: The Ambiguous Legacy of Civil Libertarianism. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Graber, Mark A. 1995. The Passive-Aggressive Virtues: Cohens v. Virginia and the Problematic Establishment of Judicial Power. Constitutional Commentary 12:67–92.Google Scholar
Gray, John Chipman. 1909. The Nature and Sources of the Law. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, Stephen M. 1996. American Constitutionalism: From Law to Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel. 1966. Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decision Making. Harvard Law Review 79:1551–64.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel 1967. Social Backgrounds and Judicial Decisions: Notes for a Theory. Journal of Politics 29:334–51.Google Scholar
Grossman, Joel B., and Tanenhaus, Joseph, eds. 1969. Frontiers of Judicial Research. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gruhl, John. 1980. The Supreme Court's Impact on the Law of Libel: Compliance by Lower Federal Courts. Western Political Quarterly 33:502–19.Google Scholar
Haines, Charles Grove. 1922. General Observations in the Effects of Personal, Political, and Economic Influences on the Decisions of Judges. Illinois Law Review 17:96–116.Google Scholar
Hall, Melinda Gann. 1995. Review of The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, by Jeffrey A. Segal and Harold J. Spaeth. Journal of Politics 57:254–55.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1961. The Concept of Law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1983. Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hellman, Arthur D. 1999. Precedent, Predictability, and Federal Appellate Structure. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 60:1029–1109.Google Scholar
Hensley, Thomas R., and Scott Johnson, P. 1998. Unanimity on the Rehnquist Court. Akron Law Review 31:387–408.Google Scholar
Hiley, David R., James Bohman, F., and Shusterman, Richard, eds. 1991. The Interpretive Turn. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver Wendell. 1881. The Common Law. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Holmes, Oliver Wendell 1897. The Path of Law. Harvard Law Review 10:457–78.Google Scholar
Howard, J. Woodford. 1981. Courts of Appeal in the Federal Judicial System: A Study of the Second, Fifth, and District of Columbia Circuits. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hutcheson, Joseph C. Jr. 1929. The Judgment Intuitive: The Function of the “Hunch” in Judicial Decision. Cornell Law Quarterly 14:274–88.Google Scholar
Jackson, Robert H. 1944. Decisional Law and Stare Decisis. American Bar Association Journal 30:334–35.Google Scholar
Johnson, Charles A. 1987. Law, Politics, and Judicial Decision Making: Lower Federal Court Uses of Supreme Court Decisions. Law and Society Review 21:325–40.Google Scholar
Kahn, Ronald. 1994. The Supreme Court and Constitutional Theory, 1953–;1993. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Kalman, Laura. 1986. Legal Realism at Yale, 1927–;1960. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Kalven, Harry Jr. 1973. Toward a Science of Impartial Judicial Behavior. University of Cincinnati Law Review 42:591–95.Google Scholar
Kelso, R. Randall, and Charles Kelso, D. 1996. How the Supreme Court Is Dealing with Precedents in Constitutional Cases. Brooklyn Law Review 62:973–1038.Google Scholar
Knight, Jack, and Epstein, Lee. 1996. The Norm of Stare Decisis. American Journal of Political Science 40:1018–35.Google Scholar
Kort, Fred. 1957. Predicting Supreme Court Cases Mathematically: Analysis of the Right to Counsel Cases. American Political Science Review 57:1–12.Google Scholar
Kort, Fred 1958. Reply to Fisher's Mathematical Analysis of Supreme Court Decisions. American Political Science Review 52:339–48.Google Scholar
Lee, Thomas R. 1999. Stare Decisis in Historical Perspective: From the Founding Era to the Rehnquist Court. Vanderbilt Law Review 52:647–735.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, Karl N. 1930. A Realistic Jurisprudence—the Next Step. Columbia Law Review 30:431–65.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, Karl N. 1931. Some Realism about Realism—Responding to Dean Pound. Harvard Law Review 44:1222–56.Google Scholar
Maltzman, Forrest, James, F. Spriggs II, and Paul Wahlbeck, J. 2000. Crafting Law on the Supreme Court: The Collegial Game. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mason, Alpheus Thomas. 1956. Harlan Fiske Stone: Pillar of the Law. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Monaghan, Henry. 1979. Taking Supreme Court Opinions Seriously. Maryland Law Review 39:1.Google Scholar
Murphy, Walter F. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Walter F., and Herman Pritchett, C. 1974. Courts, Judges, and Politics. 2nd ed. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Nagel, Stuart S. 1961. Political Party Affiliation and Judges' Decisions. American Political Science Review 55:843–50.Google Scholar
Oliphant, Herman. 1928. A Return to Stare Decisis. American Bur Association journal 14:159–63.Google Scholar
O'Neill, Timothy J. 1981. The Language of Equality in a Democratic Order. American Political Science Review 75:626–35.Google Scholar
Perry, H. W. Jr. 1991. Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Phelps, Glenn A., and John Gates, B. 1991. The Myth of Jurisprudence: Interpretive Theory in the Constitutional Opinions of Justices Rehnquist and Brennan. Santa Clara Law Review 31:567–96.Google Scholar
Pinello, Daniel R. 1999. The Impact of Legal Precedent: An Empirical Test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, August, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard A. 1990. The Problems of Jurisprudence. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pound, Roscoe. 1931. The Call for a Realist Jurisprudence. Harvard Law Review 44:697–711.Google Scholar
Powell, Thomas Reed. 1917. The Constitutional Issue in Minimum Wage Legislation. Minnesota Law Review 2:1–21.Google Scholar
Powell, Thomas Reed 1924. The Judiciality of Minimum-Wage Legislation. Harvard Law Review 37:545–73.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1948. The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values, 1937–;1947. Chicago: Quadrangle Books.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. Herman 1954. Civil Liberties and the Vinson Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Revesz, Richard L. 1997. Environmental Regulation, Ideology, and the D.C. Circuit. Virginia Law Review 83:1717–72.Google Scholar
Revesz, Richard L. 1999. Ideology, Collegiality, and the D.C. Circuit: A Reply to Chief Judge Harry T. Edwards. Virginia Law Review 85:805–51.Google Scholar
Rhode, David, and Spaeth, Harold. 1976. Supreme Court Decision Making. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 1994. Symposium: The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Law and Courts 4:6–8.Google Scholar
Scalia, Antonin. 1989. The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules. University of Chicago Law Review 56:1175–88.Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick. 1987. Precedent. Stanford Law Review 39:571–605.Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick 1988. Formalism. Yale Law Journal 97:509–48.Google Scholar
Schauer, Frederick 1991. Rules and the Rule of Law. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 14:645–94.Google Scholar
Scheb, John M. II, Bowen, Terry, and Anderson, Gary. 1991. Ideology, Role Orientations, and Behavior in the State Courts of Last Resort. American Politics Quarterly 19:324–35.Google Scholar
Schlegel, John Henry. 1979. American Legal Realism and Empirical Social Science: From the Yale Experience. Buffalo Law Review 28:459–586.Google Scholar
Schmidhauser, John R. 1959. The Justices of the Supreme Court—a Collective Portrait. Midwest Journal of Political Science 3:1–57.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon. 1958. The Study of Judicial Decision-Making as an Aspect of Political Behavior. American Political Science Review 52:1007–25.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon 1959. Quantitative Analysis of Judicial Behavior. Glencoe, Ill: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon 1963. From Public Law to Judicial Behavior. In Judicial Decision-Making, ed. Schubert, Glendon. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schubert, Glendon 1965. The Judicial Mind. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Schuck, Peter H. 1989. Why Don't Law Professors Do More Empirical Research Journal of Legal Education 39:323–36.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bernard. 1983. Supreme Chief: Earl Warren and His Supreme Court—a Judicial Biography. Unabridged ed. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A. 1984. Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically: The Search and Seizure Cases, 1962–;1981. American Political Science Review 78:891–900.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A. 1986. Supreme Court Justices as Human Decision Makers: An Individual-level Analysis of the Search and Seizure Cases. Journal of Politics 48:938–55.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Albert Cover, D. 1989. Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices. American Political Science Review 83:557–65.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Robert Howard, M. 2000. The Systematic Study of Stare Decisis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 31 Aug.-3 Sept, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold Spaeth, J. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold Spaeth, J. 1994. The Authors Respond. Law and Courts 4:10–12.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold Spaeth, J. 1996a. The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of United States Supreme Court Justices. American Journal of Political Science 40:971–1003.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold Spaeth, J. 1996b. Norms, Dragons, and Stare Decisis: A Response. American Journal of Political Science 40:1064–82.Google Scholar
Sisk, Gregory C., Heise, Michael, and Andrew Morriss, P. 1998. Charting the Influences on the Judicial Mind: An Empirical Study of Judicial Reasoning. New York University Law Review 73:1377–1500.Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1988. Political Jurisprudence, the “New Institutionalism,” and the Future of Public Law. American Political Science Review 82:89–108.Google Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. 1994. Symposium: The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Law and Courts 4:8–10.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R. 1982. Consensual and Nonconsensual Decisions in Unanimous Opinions of the United States Courts of Appeal. American Journal of Political Science 26:225–39.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R. 1987. The Impact of the United States Supreme Court on Trends in Economic Policy Making in the United States Courts of Appeals. Journal of Politics 49:830–44.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., and Haire, Susan. 1992. Integrating Alternative Approaches to the Study of Judicial Voting: Obscenity Cases in the US. Courts of Appeal. American Journal of Political Science 36:963–82.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., Jeffrey Segal, A., and Charles Cameron, M. 1994. The Hierarchy of Justice: Testing a Principal-Agent Model of Supreme Court—Circuit Court Interactions. American Journal of Political Science 38:673–96.Google Scholar
Spaeth, Harold J. 1961. An Approach to the Study of Attitudinal Differences as an Aspect of Judicial Behavior. Midwest Journal of Political Science 5:165–80.Google Scholar
Spaeth, Harold J. 1964. The Judicial Restraint of Mr. Justice Frankfurter—Myth or Reality American Journal of Political Science 8:22–38.Google Scholar
Spaeth, Harold J. 1979. Supreme Court Policy Making: Explanation and Prediction. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Spaeth, Harold J., and Jeffrey Segal, A. 2000. The U.S. Supreme Court Judicial Data Base: Providing New Insights Into the Court. Judicature 83:229–35.Google Scholar
Sterett, Susan. 1993. Review of The Supreme Court and Legal Change: Abortion and the Death Penalty, by Lee Epstein and Joseph F. Kobylka. The Law and Politics Book Review 3:74–76.Google Scholar
Tamanaha, Brian Z. 1996. The Internal/External Distinction and the Notion of “Practice” in Legal Theory and Sociolegal Studies. Law and Society Review 30:163–204.Google Scholar
Taylor, Charles. 1985. Interpretation and the Sciences of Man. In Philosophy and the Human Sciences, ed. Taylor, Charles. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. P. 1975. Whigs and Hunters: The Origin of the Black Act. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Tiller, Emerson H., and Frank Cross, B. 1999a. A Modest Proposal for Improving American Justice. Columbia Law Review 99:215–33.Google Scholar
Tiller, Emerson H., and Frank Cross, B. 1999b. A Modest Reply to Judge Wald. Columbia Law Review 99:262–69.Google Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sydney. 1960. The Analysis of Behavior Patterns on the United States Supreme Court. Journal of Politics 22:629–53.Google Scholar
Wald, Patricia M. 1999a. A Response to Tiller and Cross. Columbia Law Review 99:235–61.Google Scholar
Wald, Patricia M. 1999b. Last Thoughts. Columbia Law Review 99:270–72.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith E. 2000. Once More Unto the Breach: Postbehavioralist Approaches to Judicial Politics. Law and Social Inquiry 25:601–34.Google Scholar
Witt, Elder. 1990. Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar