FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W232290024> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W232290024 startingPage "445" @default.
• W232290024 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION Roy served a twelve-year stay as Colorado's Governor from 1987 to 1999 (1) during which he hand crafted the course of judicial affairs by personally selecting justices for the State's highest court. For better or worse, the former Governor capsulated his legacy in the appointments of six of the seven justices currently sitting on the Colorado Supreme Court--or, as it has appropriately been called, the Romer (2) While selection bias appeared minimal, skeptics questioned the Governor for appointing five fellow party members to the Supreme Court. (3) In the present, arguments remain as to whether this court is a solid, ideologically moderate panel, or judiciary controlled by liberal, activist judges. (4) In the last decade, the Colorado judiciary has received a great deal of attention from beyond Colorado's borders--in part because of three highly publicized cases, two of which had political implications. In 1994, the Colorado Supreme Court decided Evans v. Romer, confronting some of America's most endeared constitutional freedoms, including the ability to participate in political processes. (5) In 2004, Kobe Bryant's legal bonanza took the State of Colorado and the nation by storm. With millions of onlookers, Colorado courts were under a microscope. In the end, the case was abruptly dismissed and the only remnants were an opinion by the Colorado Supreme Court (6) regarding media access to court documents and the ascendance of Judge Terry Ruckriegle to figure status in a manner reminiscent of the O.J. Simpson trial. In 2003, the Colorado Supreme Court heard People ex rel. Salazar v. Davidson, which rekindled intrastate political tensions regarding legislative redistricting efforts. (7) Opponents attacked the court for what they viewed as a partisan outcome, (8) and the net result was continued strife and a Republican-led march to the United States Supreme Court on the public's tab. (9) Albeit for different reasons, each of these occurrences impacted Colorado natives and foreign onlookers by making the opaquely judicial relevant to citizens' everyday lives. (10) But it is essential to realize that judges confront these issues daily, not merely when national media outlets adopt a case as breaking news. For this reason, it is speculative to classify judges' or the court's ideological balance based on political affiliations or a few isolated decisions. When a court stands divided, ideological differences among justices tend to surface more so than in unanimous writings. (11) Thus, the optimal method for assessing the state of judicial independence within the Colorado Supreme Court is to examine separate opinions (12) issued in split-decision cases over a given period of time. By integrating voting records and trends, a judge's views can be ascertained amidst ambiguities in the author's writings. (13) Separate opinions are most probative in criminal cases and civil cases addressing public law issues because they reveal justices' voting propensities in certain issues--i.e., such as favoring individuals who face state actors in civil liberties cases, or favoring the prosecution or defense in criminal cases. (14) A natural outgrowth then becomes the division of a court's justices into a conservative or liberal (15) category to isolate tendencies and trends central to the judicial process, but often overlooked. The Colorado Supreme Court is currently in an interesting evolutionary stage. While studies of this nature often analyze courts in transition phases, the composition of Colorado's high court has not changed since 2000, and thus a unique opportunity exists to examine the dynamics of a panel of judges with extensive experience as a cohesive unit. As this study will demonstrate, however, collective experience does not necessarily foster unanimity in decision making, as evidenced by the wealth of separate opinions and adjoining votes during the years at issue. …" @default.
• W232290024 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W232290024 creator A5050295849 @default.
• W232290024 date "2005-03-22" @default.
• W232290024 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W232290024 title "Romer Party Plus One: Managing Public Law in Colorado, 2000-2004" @default.
• W232290024 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W232290024 type Work @default.
• W232290024 sameAs 232290024 @default.
• W232290024 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W232290024 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W232290024 hasAuthorship W232290024A5050295849 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C205649164 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C2777601356 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C2909001134 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C46415393 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C47855350 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C58640448 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C61192294 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C87501996 @default.
• W232290024 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C11413529 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C144024400 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C17744445 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C199539241 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C205649164 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C2777601356 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C2778272461 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C2909001134 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C41008148 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C46415393 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C47855350 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C48103436 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C58640448 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C61192294 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C87501996 @default.
• W232290024 hasConceptScore W232290024C94625758 @default.
• W232290024 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W232290024 hasLocation W2322900241 @default.
• W232290024 hasOpenAccess W232290024 @default.
• W232290024 hasPrimaryLocation W2322900241 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W1577076547 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W1600451741 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W2009811765 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W244842935 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W261816621 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W2774340292 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W28231646 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W301539970 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W304571794 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3122428521 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3122794267 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3122852427 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3123481414 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3123693769 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3125744724 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3125836166 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W3125995363 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W338120031 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W340643213 @default.
• W232290024 hasRelatedWork W79918267 @default.
• W232290024 hasVolume "68" @default.
• W232290024 isParatext "false" @default.
• W232290024 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W232290024 magId "232290024" @default.
• W232290024 workType "article" @default.