Judges’ role conceptions can override their personal moral beliefs in voting

Evidence

Judicial role orientations operate as self-imposed obligations, restricting the actions that a judge will undertake. They are important because they can affect judicial decisions. For example, role orientations may prevent judges from voting in line with their personal beliefs. As Box 8.2 shows, in Furman v. Georgia Justice Harry Blackmun voted to uphold the constitutionality of the death penalty even though he abhorred capital punishment on moral grounds. Similarly, Felix Frankfurter voted to uphold state laws requiring students to salute the American flag despite his opposition to such laws. In both instance, the justices voted as they did because of their conceptions of appropriate judicial behavior—in particular, their belief that a judge’s personal convictions should not affect his vote. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1325

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines judicial role orientations as self-imposed obligations that can block judges from voting their personal beliefs.
• XREF: Connects to ch53 highlight that justices who favor an outcome may suppress those views on role-conception grounds. — connects to: Americans hold contradictory expectations of judges as neutral and representative — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 380; Judicial decisions result from attitudes, role conceptions, and institutional constraints interacting together. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1286; Justices’ ideological outlooks directly produce their voting patterns. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1312 (+7 more)
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• Legal training and role orientation partially neutralize judges’ personal beliefs #corroborates (0.90) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1366
• Judges’ role beliefs are socialized through professional training and practice #expands (0.85)
• Judges’ personal attributes and even trivial bodily states can shape decisions #complicates (0.80)
• Variation in judges’ role conceptions, not state law, explains divergent school finance rulings. #exemplifies (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3302
• Judges rely on personal values when competing legal principles are evenly balanced #qualifies (0.78) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 156
• Party influence on judges works through shared values, not direct commands #corroborates (0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 605
• Generational political events shape judges’ values like those of other citizens #qualifies (0.72) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2575