Robert J. Hume – författare

In Courthouse Democracy and Minority Rights: Same-Sex Marriage in the States, Robert J. Hume examines how the democratization of state courts and state constitutional systems has influenced the capacity of judges to protect minority rights. Through an intensive examination of same-sex marriage policy, Hume shows that democratic innovations like judicial elections and initiative amendment procedures have conditioned the impact of judges on state marriage laws. Using a combination of original and publicly available data, Hume demonstrates that "courthouse democracy " has influenced the behavior of state judges, the reactions of the public to state court decisions, and the long-term policy consequences of these decisions, including the passage of state constitutional amendments. Hume concludes that judges will be capable of producing meaningful social change-and protecting minority rights-only when they have the institutional resources that they need to stand against popular opinion.

What impact do federal courts have on the administrative agencies of the federal government? How do agencies react to the decisions of federal courts? This book answers these questions by examining the responses of federal agencies to the U.S. Courts of Appeals, revealing what happens inside agencies after courts rule against them. Robert J. Hume draws upon dozens of interviews with current and former administrators, taking readers behind the scenes of these organizations to reveal their internal procedures, their attitudes about courts, and their surprising capacity to be influenced by a judge’s choice of words. This fascinating study will be of interest to students and scholars of politics as well as those seeking great understanding of the intricacies of the US political system.

What impact do federal courts have on the administrative agencies of the federal government? How do agencies react to the decisions of federal courts? This book answers these questions by examining the responses of federal agencies to the U.S. Courts of Appeals, revealing what happens inside agencies after courts rule against them. Robert J. Hume draws upon dozens of interviews with current and former administrators, taking readers behind the scenes of these organizations to reveal their internal procedures, their attitudes about courts, and their surprising capacity to be influenced by a judge’s choice of words. This fascinating study will be of interest to students and scholars of politics as well as those seeking great understanding of the intricacies of the US political system.

Examines the causes and consequences of recusal behavior on the US Supreme Court.Do US Supreme Court justices withdraw from cases when they are supposed to? What happens when the Court is down a member? In Ethics and Accountability on the US Supreme Court, Robert J. Hume provides the first comprehensive examination of the causes and consequences of recusal behavior on the Supreme Court. Using original data, and with rich attention to historical detail including media commentary about recusals, he systematically analyzes the factors that influence Supreme Court recusal, a process which has so far been shrouded in secrecy. It is revealed that justices do not strictly follow the recusal guidelines set by Congress, but at the same time they do not ignore these rules. Overall, justices are selective in their compliance with the recusal statute, balancing ethical considerations against other institutional and policy goals, such as the duty to sit. However, the book also concludes that the impact of recusals on policymaking is more limited than commentators have claimed, raising questions about whether ethics reform is really needed at this time.

Examines the causes and consequences of recusal behavior on the US Supreme Court.Do US Supreme Court justices withdraw from cases when they are supposed to? What happens when the Court is down a member? In Ethics and Accountability on the US Supreme Court, Robert J. Hume provides the first comprehensive examination of the causes and consequences of recusal behavior on the Supreme Court. Using original data, and with rich attention to historical detail including media commentary about recusals, he systematically analyzes the factors that influence Supreme Court recusal, a process which has so far been shrouded in secrecy. It is revealed that justices do not strictly follow the recusal guidelines set by Congress, but at the same time they do not ignore these rules. Overall, justices are selective in their compliance with the recusal statute, balancing ethical considerations against other institutional and policy goals, such as the duty to sit. However, the book also concludes that the impact of recusals on policymaking is more limited than commentators have claimed, raising questions about whether ethics reform is really needed at this time.