FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2003363358> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2003363358 abstract "Many points raised by Dr. Evan J. Ringquist's response in this issue already are addressed in my article, so readers should simply review its relevant portions. Just as he indicated that space constraints limited his response, I am limited to focusing on his comments that are less fully addressed in my article. Role of Judges Starting where Dr. Ringquist's response ended, I too am concerned about professional reputation[s] of (2001:697) authors, not only his and mine, but also of other researchers in this field. They need to be aware of concerns about studies' methodologies that they might emulate, so they can make informed decisions about how to proceed. Furthermore, I am concerned about the professional reputations of the people who are the primary topics of Dr. Ringquist's research-judges. Dr. Ringquist (1998) hypothesized that judges' decisions were biased due to race, class, politics, and ideology, but, in fact, as my article demonstrates, judges do not even make those decisions. Obviously the key theoretical difference between his views and mine is whether judges decide penalties in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) civil judicial cases. Dr. Ringquist now acknowledges that judges have a limited role, because almost all such cases are settled rather than litigated and decided by judges. While he claimed that this is obvious in his articles (2001:695), only four times therein did he mention that the EPA might have a role in determining penalties (Ringquist 1998:1157; Ringquist & Emmert 1999:12, 24). In contrast, he stated several dozens of times that judges levied, imposed, assessed, or otherwise determined penalties. Dr. Ringquist appears to defend using judicial characteristics as causal variables by somewhat agreeing with my statement that court must not rubberstamp the agreement, but also must not substitute its own judgment for that of the parties to the (Atlas 2001:646; Ringquist 2001:695). However, this quotation should not be taken out of context to suggest that I believe judges have a significant role in settled cases. It is a legal fact that judges can only accept or reject proposed consent decrees in settled cases, and cannot impose penalties themselves. It is an empirical fact that judges virtually never reject proposed consent decrees. Thus, the penalties in settled cases, which compose more than 90% of all EPA civil judicial cases, are those agreed to by the EPA and by the defendants. If Dr. Ringquist wants to hypothesize that the characteristics of judges affected the penalties that the litigants agreed to in settled cases, he must provide a theory explaining how judges successfully pressure litigants to propose penalties to which they would not otherwise agree. Thus, his theory fails primarily because it provides no link between judicial characteristics and litigants' actions-a daunting task because a judge's power is severely limited to influence consent decrees. A judge must defer to the litigants' desire to settle; can only reject a consent decree if it is unfair, unreasonable, or inadequate; and can have his or her rejection overturned on appeal. It is difficult to imagine why litigants would feel susceptible to judicial pressure; thus, the characteristics of the judge would be irrelevant. Consequently, references to studies examining the effects of judges' characteristics and social environment on such decisions are irrelevant, because judges do not make these decisions. Dr. Ringquist cited two other works, McSpadden (1997) and Kubasek and Silverman (2000), as specifically supporting his claim that judges affect penalties in consent decrees (Ringquist 2001:685). However, the McSpadden text, from a section titled Court Oversight of Administrative Discretion, pertains explicitly to judicial involvement in legal challenges by others against EPA regulations and administrative decisions, not to enforcement actions against others by the EPA. …" @default.
• W2003363358 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2003363358 creator A5018644957 @default.
• W2003363358 date "2001-01-01" @default.
• W2003363358 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W2003363358 title "Safe and Sound Judgment" @default.
• W2003363358 cites W1996660612 @default.
• W2003363358 cites W2083169733 @default.
• W2003363358 cites W2085887865 @default.
• W2003363358 cites W3124858309 @default.
• W2003363358 doi "https://doi.org/10.2307/3185400" @default.
• W2003363358 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W2003363358 type Work @default.
• W2003363358 sameAs 2003363358 @default.
• W2003363358 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2003363358 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2003363358 hasAuthorship W2003363358A5018644957 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C108170787 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C158071213 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C2777179996 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C48798503 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C108170787 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C144024400 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C15744967 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C158071213 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C17744445 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C199539241 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C2777179996 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C36289849 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C48798503 @default.
• W2003363358 hasConceptScore W2003363358C94625758 @default.
• W2003363358 hasLocation W20033633581 @default.
• W2003363358 hasOpenAccess W2003363358 @default.
• W2003363358 hasPrimaryLocation W20033633581 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1266644673 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1503577368 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1517822021 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1532603141 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1544554100 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W1560672263 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2058138769 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W211534895 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2205513482 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2270900390 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W23167948 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2594554449 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2735218540 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2752820793 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W288585395 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W2948186534 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W3121898705 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W3156605574 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W803274879 @default.
• W2003363358 hasRelatedWork W83864298 @default.
• W2003363358 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2003363358 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2003363358 magId "2003363358" @default.
• W2003363358 workType "article" @default.