Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T19:02:15.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Judicial Decision Making In the Supreme Court of Canada: Updating the Personal Attribute Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2007

Donald R. Songer  and
Susan W. Johnson
Donald R. Songer
Affiliation:
University of South Carolina
Susan W. Johnson
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Greensboro
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. This study seeks to add to the current understanding of the political nature of the Supreme Court of Canada. We analyze a data set consisting of all nonunanimous published Supreme Court decisions for the period 1949 to 2000. A prior study by Tate and Sittiwong (1989) suggested a model of judge attributes for the period 1949 to 1985. We build on that analysis by extending the time period to 2000, which allows the impact of gender also to be assessed. We find that since the Court gained substantial docket control, the types of cases the Court hears has changed from the period studied by Tate and Sittiwong. In the more recent period, civil rights and liberties cases are much more substantial in number. We conclude some of the variables in the Tate and Sittiwong study may be time bound and we suggest a new model of attitudinal voting.

Résumé. Cet étude cherche de augmenter le savoir courant du le nature politique du Cour suprême du Canada. Nous analysons un ensemble de données non unanime compose de tout décisions publié du Cour suprême entre les années 1949 à 1985. Une enquête précède fait par Tate et Sittiwong (1989) a proposé un modèle des attributs des juges pour la période entre 1949 à 1985. Nous poursuivons laquelle analyse pour prolonger la période du temps jusqu'à 2000, ce que on permettre évalue l'effet du sexe aussi. Nous trouvons que comme le Cour a conquis considérable control du registre, les gendres dossier entendre par le Cour ont changé depuis le période de enquête de Tate y Sittiwong. Pendent le période plus récent les dossiers concernant les droits civiles et libertés sont beaucoup plus nombreux. Nous concluons que possiblement, quelques variables de l'enquête du Tate et Sittiwong soient liées par le temp et nous proposent un modèle neuf des votes attitudinal.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 911 - 934
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

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

Allen, David W. and Diane E. Wall. 1993. “Role Orientations and Women State Supreme Court Justices.” Judicature 77: 232–35.Google Scholar
Atkins, Burton M. and Justin Greene. 1976. “Consensus on the United States Courts of Appeals: Illusion or Reality?” American Journal of Political Science 19: 735–48.Google Scholar
Baar, Carl. 1991. “Judicial Activism in Canada.” In Judicial Activism in Comparative Perspective, ed. Kenneth M. Holland. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Becker, Theodore L. 1970. Comparative Judicial Politics: The Political Functioning of Courts. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Brudney, James J., Sara Schiavoni and Deborah J. Merritt. 1999. “Judicial Hostility Towards Labor Unions? Applying the Social Background Model to a Celebrated Concern.” Ohio State Law Journal 60: 1675–765.Google Scholar
Bushnell, Ian. 1992. The Captive Court: A Study of the Supreme Court of Canada. Montreal: McGill–Queen's University Press.
Bzdera, Andre. 1993. “Comparative Analysis of Federal High Courts: A Political Theory of Judicial Review.” Canadian Journal of Political Science XXVI: 1.Google Scholar
Canada Supreme Court Reports. Ottawa: Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada.
Canadian Who's Who. Annual Publication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Dion, Stephane. 1992. “Explaining Quebec Nationalism.” In The Collapse of Canada? ed. R. Kent Weaver. Washington DC: The Brookings Institution.
Dyck, Rand. 2000. Canadian Politics: Critical Approaches. Scarborough ON: Nelson Thomson Learning.
Epp, Charles R. 1996. “Do Bills of Rights Matter? The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” American Political Science Review 90: 4.Google Scholar
Flango, Victor E. and Theodore L. Becker. 1967. “Judicial Decision-Making in the Philippines and in Hawaii.” Unpublished paper, Department of Political Science, University of Hawaii. Reported in Comparative Judicial Politics: The Political Functioning of Courts, ed. Theodore L. Becker. 1970. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Fouts, Donald E. 1969. “Policy-Making in the Supreme Court of Canada, 1958–1967.” In Comparative Judicial Behavior: Cross-Cultural Studies of Political Decision-Making in the East and West, ed. Glendon Schubert and David J. Danelski. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gadbois, George H., Jr. 1969. “Selection, Background Characteristics, and Voting Behavior of Indian Supreme Court Judges, 1950–1959.” In Comparative Judicial Behavior: Cross-Cultural Studies of Political Decision-Making in the East and West, ed. Glendon Schubert and David J. Danelski. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gadbois, George H., Jr. 1987. “The Institutionalization of the Supreme Court of India.” In Comparative Judicial Systems: Challenging the Frontiers in Conceptual and Empirical Analysis, ed. John R. Schmidhauser. London: Butterworths.
Gaines, Brian J. 1999. “Duverger's Law and the Meaning of Canadian Exceptionalism.” Comparative Political Studies 32: 835–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Sheldon. 1975. “Voting Behavior on the US Courts of Appeals Revisited.” American Political Science Review 69: 491–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, Ian, Carl Baar, Peter McCormick, George Szablowski and Martin Short. 1998. Final Appeal: Decision-Making in Canadian Courts of Appeals. Toronto: James Lorimer & Company.
Heard, Andrew D. 1991. “The Charter in the Supreme Court of Canada: The Importance of Which Judges Hear an Appeal.” Canadian Journal of Political Science XXIV: 2.Google Scholar
Holland, Kenneth M. 1988. “The Courts in the Federal Republic of Germany.” In The Political Role of Law Courts in Modern Democracies, ed. Jerold L. Waltman and Kenneth M. Holland. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Irvine, William P. and H. Gold. 1980. “Do Frozen Cleavages Ever Go Stale? The Bases of the Canadian and Australian Party Systems.” British Journal of Political Science 10 (2): 187–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Andre Blais, Henry E. Brady and Jean Crete. 1992. Letting the People Decide: Dynamics of a Canadian Election. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
McCormick, Peter. 1998. “Birds of a Feather: Alliances and Influences on the Lamer Court 1990–1997.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 36 (2): 340–69.Google Scholar
McCormick, Peter and Ian Greene. 1990. Inside the Canadian Judicial System: Judges and Judging. Toronto: James Lorimer & Co.
Morton, F.L. and Rainer Knopff. 2000. The Charter Revolution and the Court Party. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.
Morton, F.L., Peter H. Russell and Michael J. Withey. 1992. “The Supreme Court's First One Hundred Charter of Rights Decisions: A Statistical Analysis.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal. 30: 1–49.Google Scholar
Ostberg, C.L. and Matthew Wetstein. 1998. “Dimensions of Attitudes Underlying Search and Seizure Decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science XXXI: 4.Google Scholar
Peck, Sidney R. 1969. “A Scalogram Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada 1958–1967.” In Comparative Judicial Behavior: Cross-Cultural Studies of Political Decision-Making in the East and West, ed. Glendon Schubert and David J. Danelski. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1948. The Roosevelt Court: A Study in Judicial Politics and Values 1937–1947. New York: Macmillan.
Robertson, David. 1998. Judicial Discretion in the House of Lords. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Russell, Peter H. 1995. “Canadian Constraints on Judicialization from Without.” In The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, ed. C. Neal Tate and Torbjorn Vallinder. New York: New York University Press.
Russell, Peter H. 1991. Constitutional Odyssey: Can Canadians be a Sovereign People? Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Schubert, Glendon. 1965. The Judicial Mind: The Attitudes and Ideologies of Supreme Court Justices, 1946–1963. Evanston IL.: Northwestern University Press.
Segal, Jeffrey A. and Harold J. Spaeth. 1993. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Songer, Donald R. and Kelly Crews-Meyer. 2000. “Does Judge Gender Matter? Decision Making in State Supreme Courts.” Social Science Quarterly 81: 750–62.Google Scholar
Songer, Donald R., Sue Davis and Susan Haire. 1994. “A Reappraisal of Diversification in the Federal Courts: Gender Effects in the Courts of Appeals.” Journal of Politics 56: 425–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Alec. 1992. “Abstract Constitutional Review and Policy Making in Western Europe.” In Comparative Judicial Review and Public Policy, ed. Donald W. Jackson and C. Neal Tate. Westport CT: Greenwood Press.
Supreme Court of Canada. 2000. The Supreme Court of Canada and Its Justices 1875–2000: A Commemorative Book. Dundurn Group and the Supreme Court of Canada.
Tate, C. Neal. 1981. “Personal Attribute Models of the Voting Behavior of US Supreme Court Justices: Liberalism in Civil Liberties and Economic Decisions, 1946–1978.” American Political Science Review 75: 355–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tate, C. Neal and Roger Handberg. 1991. “Time Binding and Theory Building in Personal Attribute Models of Supreme Court Voting Behavior, 1916–88.” American Journal of Political Science 35 (2): 460–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tate, C. Neal and Paul Sittiwong. 1989. “Decision Making in the Canadian Supreme Court: Extending the Personal Attributes Model Across Nations.” Journal of Politics 51 (4): 900–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tate, C. Neal and Torbjorn Vallinder. 1995. “The Global Expansion of Judicial Power: the Judicialization of Politics.” In The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, ed. C. Neal Tate and Torbjorn Vallinder. New York: New York University Press.
Taylor, Charles. 1993. Reconciling the Solitudes: Essays on Canadian Federalism and Nationalism. Montreal: McGill–Queens University Press.
Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1973. “Social Background as an Indicator to the Votes of Supreme Court Justices in Criminal Cases: 1947–1956 Terms.” American Journal of Political Science 17: 622–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1986. “Are Social Background Models Time-Bound?” American Political Science Review 80: 957–67.Google Scholar
Walker, Thomas G. and Deborah J. Barrow. 1985. “The Diversification of the Federal Bench: Policy and Process Ramifications.” Journal of Politics 47: 596–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar