Vol. 5 No. 2 (February, 1995) pp. 36-38
SPECIAL ISSUE, JUDICIAL PROCESS TEXTS
Michael W. McCann, Editor
JUDICIAL POLITICS: READINGS FROM JUDICATURE by Elliot E. Slotnick
(Editor). Chicago: American Judicature Society, 1992. 664 pp.
Paper $27.95.
Reviewed by William Haltom, Department of Politics and
Government, University of Puget Sound.
This reader collects sixty-nine articles previously published in
JUDICATURE, the journal of the American Judicature Society.
Guided in part by a survey of potential adopters, Professor
Slotnick has organized articles on legal matters in the United
States into eight major sections: the role of the Supreme Court
in the constitutional system [pp. 1-51], major officials and
actors in jural processes [pp. 53-272], issues of representation
[pp. 273-326], trial courts [pp. 327-388], appellate court
processes [pp. 389-496], judicial publics'' such as media and
Congress [pp. 497-605], alternative dispute resolution [pp.
607-637], and judicial policy-making [pp. 639-660].
Both the propensities of the journal and the norms of instructors
have shaped this compendium, making it doubly mainstream. Hence,
instructors' and students' orientations toward legal, political,
and academic mainstreams will determine the utility of this
volume. Almost all articles will prove useful to some instructors
and many students, and the large number of articles will permit
adopters to select and to assign many readings tailored to
readers' sophistication and specialization.
Introductory courses on courts feature attention to judicial nuts
and bolts,'' so many instructors will seek articles to supplement
main textbooks. In this reader, they will find elementary,
accessible, and pithy descriptions of legal officers and offices
that are novel even to well prepared beginners [for examples, the
Solicitor General, U. S. magistrates, and law clerks]. Other
selections conveniently enrich or update understanding of
subjects about which students have some preconceptions [for
examples, juries, jurors, and cameras in courtrooms] or may be
reading elsewhere [for examples, differences between arbitration
and mediation or the American Bar Association's Committee on
Federal Judiciary]. Professor Slotnick has included enough such
supplementary essays to justify the expense of the reader.
The reader also includes historical vignettes to inform
undergraduate naifs and graduate sophisticates alike. The demise
of Chief Justice Rose Bird and her allies on the California
Supreme Court, the historical sweep of appointments to the United
States Supreme Court, the battle of amici curiae in WEBSTER v.
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES, trends in the Warren and Burger
Courts evident from the Supreme Court Data Base, and the Burger
Court's tendencies in state civil liberties cases all provide
perspective to a range of readers. Very few of the articles are
highly specific and almost none struck me as recondite. Indeed, I
could envision teaching an upper-division course or pro-seminar
that used this reader to represent aspects of the sub-field of
public law.
Among the most valuable resources in the collection are analyses
that are as accessible as but far more penetrating than almost
all journalism and many textbooks. Tyros and veterans alike will
profit from such readings. The unanticipated consequences of
limiting the jurisdiction of federal courts and
Page 37 follows:
the often unacknowledged successes of the Legal Services
Corporation are two studies that should inform policy-makers,
pundits, and reporters but seldom seem to do so. Even attentive
readers of mass media, then, can mine such serious but
understandable essays. Professor Canon's classic
dimensionalization of judicial activism'' and Professor Wasby's
deft unraveling of judicial imperialism'' could, by themselves,
immunize readers against perhaps half the fallacious reasoning
and fatuous rhetoric about judges and courts that foul newsprint
and fill airwaves. These essays, by showing students what skilled
inquiry and relentless logic can accomplish, may motivate readers
to pursue less prosaic and more intellectual information.
Instructors and students in advanced courses will also appreciate
surveys, updates, and reassessments of topical but enduring
questions. The four articles on U. S. juries, for example, neatly
summarize problems with reducing the size of juries and the
degree of unanimity necessary for verdicts, the relationship of
juror characteristics to jury verdicts, knowledge and ignorance
regarding scientific jury selection, and enhancing jurors'
ability to handle complex cases. What scholars have learned and
what they do not yet know about judicial-retention elections,
appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States, and
presidents' efforts to shape federal courts nicely augment
appreciation of the politics of judicial recruitment. Multiple
articles on judicial review, judicial activism, and judicial
policy-making also seem well tailored to inform debates among
somewhat experienced undergraduates. Articles on the pace of
civil litigation and judicial supervision of guilty pleas may
prove too challenging for many students but will please more
advanced and more empirical tastes.
Few of the entries aspire to or attain very imposing theory, but
the exceptions are telling. An assessment of the effects of race
on the criminal justice system does not by itself advance theory
but clearly bears on conventional and critical theories of
criminal justice. Professors Watson and Stookey create a
theoretical model of confirmation hearings for U. S. Supreme
Court justices that will inform scholar and student alike.
The good news about this reader, in sum, is that Professor
Slotnick was selective but also inclusive, with the result that
teachers about law and courts will find many articles that suit
their pedagogy, objectives, and students.
On the other hand, the predilections of the referees and editors
of JUDICATURE and the preferences of surveyed faculty have led to
selections and patterns of selections that may disappoint some
potential adopters.
Perhaps the most annoying tendency is the emphasis on the United
States Supreme Court. The preponderance of Supreme Court articles
may reflect a) major trends in JUDICATURE, b) the enthusiasms of
instructors and students, c) curricula of most colleges, or d)
all of the above. Whatever the reason for the imbalance, the
imbalance is staggering at times. The sub-section Access and
Docketing Decisions'' ought to provide among its five entries at
least one that focuses on courts other than the Supremes'' to
battle the belief that all or most of the legal action takes
place in the District of Columbia, if for
Page 38 follows:
no other reason. The section labeled Appellate Court Processes''
consists of ten articles, of which nine wholly or mostly concern
the Supreme Court of the United States! Do not let the label of
the sub-section States and State Courts'' fool you: three out of
five articles therein mostly pertain to the High Court.
Instructors battling over-emphasis on the Supreme Court will find
too little to assist their efforts in this collection.
Instructors who stress sub-national'' judiciaries in their
courses will find it even less helpful. JUDICIAL POLITICS has
become nationalized.'' Only the most imaginative coder would
regard a third of the articles in the compendium as pertinent to
state or local courts, officers, or institutions.
Instructors whose courses take a comparative approach to the
study of courts will find no help. JUDICATURE seldom informs the
study of comparative law and comparative judicial process and
behavior, and few scholars and instructors test their knowledge
outside the borders of the United States, so I suppose it is
understandable that this collection pertains to comparative law,
process, and behavior barely if at all. I understand this
imbalance but do not regard it as a justification.
Aside from these three systematic disappointments, tastes will
determine whether adopters and students will be pleased or
annoyed with selections. Introductory students may enjoy glib
remarks from such celebrities as Senators Simon and Heflin, Judge
Wallace, and Justices Stevens and Brennan, but I suspect that
advanced students will find at most a convenient footnote for
obvious points. In contrast, too many of the inside baseball''
articles are so uncritical that they may mislead less informed
students. As a Supreme Court beat reporter fawns over his
sources, for instance, astute students may see how the Court
secures favorable coverage and how the myth of mechanical
jurisprudence is reinforced for television viewers, but gullible
students may be utterly disarmed. In a similar manner, advanced
students will probably benefit from critiquing the four panel
discussions, which newcomers will find as riveting as an evening
of C-SPAN.
In sum, JUDICIAL POLITICS is no box of chocolates. You can see
what you are likely to get. For many courses and many students,
this collection will be useful as required or recommended
reading. However, instructors out of the mainstream, either those
who approach courts and law from broadly theoretical, contextual,
or critical perspectives, or those who design their courses to
overcome overemphasis on the Highest Court, national courts, and
U. S. courts, might use this reader only to identify major biases
in the sub-discipline.