Judges’ role beliefs are socialized through professional training and practice

Evidence

In some states, the courts upheld school finance programs, but in others they invalidated them. Given the similarities among the challenged programs, why did state courts disagree about their constitutionality? Differences in state law do not account for the disparate rulings, as state courts reached opposite results despite interpreting virtually identical constitutional provisions. These conflicting outcomes may reflect differences in judges’ conceptions of the judicial role (see Chapter 9). Some state judges, stressing the importance of judicial restraint, upheld school finance programs because they believed it proper to defer to the state legislature. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3302 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Failing that, the exchange of views may narrow the differences among the judges. … Because so much hinges on the opinions issuing from the court, appellate judges need to be good writers. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 577 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

The attitudes of judges determine what they want to do; their role conceptions— that is, their conceptions of proper judicial behavior—affect what judges believe they ought to do; and public opinion and the institutional context in which they operate circumscribe what judges find it feasible to do. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1286 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Judges’ role conceptions can override their personal moral beliefs in voting — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1325; Legal training and role orientation partially neutralize judges’ personal beliefs — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1366; Regional political culture shapes the attitudes judges bring to the bench — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2576 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Variation in judges’ role conceptions, not state law, explains divergent school finance rulings. #exemplifies (0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3302
• Judicial decisions result from attitudes, role conceptions, and institutional constraints interacting together. #expands (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1286
• Opinion-drafting dialogue among appellate judges shapes or narrows their collective decisions #qualifies (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 577
• Generational political events shape judges’ values like those of other citizens #expands (0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2575