Richard W. Waterman – författare

Examines and measures the extent to which statutory language affects judicial behavior.How does the language of legislative statutes affect judicial behavior? Scholars of the judiciary have rarely studied this question despite statutes being, theoretically, the primary opportunity for legislatures to ensure that those individuals who interpret the law will follow their preferences. In Checking the Courts, Kirk A. Randazzo and Richard W. Waterman offer a model that integrates ideological and legal factors through an empirical measure of statutory discretion. The model is tested across multiple judicial institutions, at both the federal and state levels, and reveals that judges are influenced by the levels of discretion afforded in the legislative statutes. In those cases where lawmakers have clear policy preferences, legislation encourages judges to strictly interpret the plain meaning of the law. Conversely, if policy preferences are unclear, legislation leaves open the possibility that judges will make decisions based on their own ideological policy preferences. Checking the Courts thus provides us with a better understanding of the dynamic interplay between law and ideology.

Examines and measures the extent to which statutory language affects judicial behavior.How does the language of legislative statutes affect judicial behavior? Scholars of the judiciary have rarely studied this question despite statutes being, theoretically, the primary opportunity for legislatures to ensure that those individuals who interpret the law will follow their preferences. In Checking the Courts, Kirk A. Randazzo and Richard W. Waterman offer a model that integrates ideological and legal factors through an empirical measure of statutory discretion. The model is tested across multiple judicial institutions, at both the federal and state levels, and reveals that judges are influenced by the levels of discretion afforded in the legislative statutes. In those cases where lawmakers have clear policy preferences, legislation encourages judges to strictly interpret the plain meaning of the law. Conversely, if policy preferences are unclear, legislation leaves open the possibility that judges will make decisions based on their own ideological policy preferences. Checking the Courts thus provides us with a better understanding of the dynamic interplay between law and ideology.

This text provides an analysis of the EPA enforcement of the Clean Water Act and its amendments. The book uses extensive EPA data, including a survey of the EPA and state level environmental officials, to examine enforcement from the perspective of the enforcement personnel.

This text provides an analysis of the EPA enforcement of the Clean Water Act and its amendments. The book uses extensive EPA data, including a survey of the EPA and state level environmental officials, to examine enforcement from the perspective of the enforcement personnel.

This book takes a social science approach to address two related questions: (1) what does Donald Trump say on Twitter?

Comedies were among the first films ever made, and comedy played a critical and often overlooked role in the early development of cinema. This original book holistically examines the political and sociological dimensions of silent comedy films and the motion picture industry at the turn of the 20th century. Richard Waterman takes a unique social science approach to the cinematic ecosystem and its development during this era, studying the wider context – the interconnected social, political, economic, and technological movements and forces – that shaped film production, distribution, and consumption in this pivotal period in the history of film and culture. These include moral standards and censorship, class, racism, antisemitism, sexism, and the global film market. Additionally, the book analyzes specific films in-depth to mine their themes, social context, and impact. Bridging the humanities and social sciences, this is a distinctive and valuable contribution to the study of early cinema.

Examines the role of constitutional ambiguity across the entire spectrum of American history and how it impacts our interpretation of presidential power.While the rise of autocratic presidential powers has been widely noted by scholars in recent years, with calls by some for a stronger or more accountable presidency, Constitutional Ambiguity and the Interpretation of Presidential Power is among the first entirely dedicated to a study of the impact of this ambiguity on how scholars, judges, and presidents have understood executive power. Embarking on a detailed examination of legal, historical, and political science literature across the broad scope of American history, Richard W. Waterman examines the concerns of the Constitution's Framers regarding the fear of monarchy and a tyrannical president. He then discusses the writing and ratification of the Constitution and by drawing on insights from the time of the Framers to the present day, he provides a unique historical timeline related to the discussion and analysis of constitutional ambiguity. Over the course of several chapters, he finds that no sole theory defines presidential power, and ambiguity rules the day, allowing presidents to find power in the Constitution's silences as well as its various nooks and crannies, which has led to the very real danger of an autocratic presidency.

Examines the role of constitutional ambiguity across the entire spectrum of American history and how it impacts our interpretation of presidential power.While the rise of autocratic presidential powers has been widely noted by scholars in recent years, with calls by some for a stronger or more accountable presidency, Constitutional Ambiguity and the Interpretation of Presidential Power is among the first entirely dedicated to a study of the impact of this ambiguity on how scholars, judges, and presidents have understood executive power. Embarking on a detailed examination of legal, historical, and political science literature across the broad scope of American history, Richard W. Waterman examines the concerns of the Constitution's Framers regarding the fear of monarchy and a tyrannical president. He then discusses the writing and ratification of the Constitution and by drawing on insights from the time of the Framers to the present day, he provides a unique historical timeline related to the discussion and analysis of constitutional ambiguity. Over the course of several chapters, he finds that no sole theory defines presidential power, and ambiguity rules the day, allowing presidents to find power in the Constitution's silences as well as its various nooks and crannies, which has led to the very real danger of an autocratic presidency.

A timely examination of the president's Article II powers and duties at a moment in history when an autocratic presidency is a very real possibility.Today we confront a potential constitutional crisis, with the presidency dominating the other branches of government. A basic question is how has the presidency become so powerful and does the Constitution present any limits on presidential power? While the Constitution's words have not changed since they were written in 1787, today's presidents, based on the Unitary Executive Theory, find a vast degree of power in clauses that originally provided limits on presidential authority. In Through the Constitution's Eyes Richard W. Waterman examines the historical transition of each of the president's powers and duties to demonstrate how each has been transformed across American history. Making reference to a range of writings from the Constitutional Convention to the present day, much of it unseen by scholars for more than a century, Waterman uncovers insights relevant to our own turbulent times and provides us with a new way of thinking about presidential power. Specifically he presents chapters on the oath of office, the executive vesting, take care, commander-in-chief, appointment, and treaty and receive ambassadors clauses. In each case presidential power has expanded far beyond the Framers' intent, creating the potential for the very tyranny the Framers sought to prevent.