When to Hold, When to Fold, and When to Reshuffle: The Art of Decisionmaking on a Multi-Member Court

This Essay explores the instrumental and normative considerations that prompt judges to publish separate opinions. After discussing the traditions of separate writing in American judicial practice, the author provides a contemporary judge's perspective on the aims of separate opinions and on th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:California law review 2012-12, Vol.100 (6), p.1445-1477
Main Author: Wood, Diane P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Appellate courts
Decision making
Dissenting opinions
En banc
Federal court decisions
Federal government
Judges
Judges & magistrates
Judicial power
Jurisdiction
Prisoners
Rehearings
Statutory law
Supreme Court justices
The Brennan Center Jorde Symposium on Constitutional Law
United States Supreme Court opinions
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This Essay explores the instrumental and normative considerations that prompt judges to publish separate opinions. After discussing the traditions of separate writing in American judicial practice, the author provides a contemporary judge's perspective on the aims of separate opinions and on the cost-benefit analysis that judges invariably undertake when contemplating whether to write a concurrence or dissent. Turning to her own work on the Seventh Circuit, the author then identifies three broad categories of dissents she has penned over the past sixteen years: "principle-based dissents," "process-based dissents," and "accuracy-focused dissents." The Essay concludes by suggesting that a more forthright appraisal of the dynamics of decisionmaking on multi-member courts could benefit the judicial system as a whole.
ISSN:0008-1221
1942-6542