Are judges' decisions more likely to be based on personal inclinations or legal
authority? The answer, Eileen Braman argues, is both. Law, Politics, and Perception brings cognitive
psychology to bear on the question of the relative importance of norms of legal reasoning versus
decision markers' policy preferences in legal decision-making. While Braman acknowledges that
decision makers' attitudes--or, more precisely, their preference for policy outcomes--can
play a significant role in judicial decisions, she also believes that decision-makers' belief
that they must abide by accepted rules of legal analysis significantly limits the role of
preferences in their judgements. To reconcile these competing factors, Braman posits that judges
engage in "motivated reasoning," a biased process in which decision-makers are unconsciously
predisposed to find legal authority that is consistent with their own preferences more convincing
than those that go against them. But Braman also provides evidence that the scope of motivated
reasoning is limited. Objective case facts and accepted norms of legal reasoning can often inhibit
decision makers' ability to reach conclusions consistent with their preferences.
Copyright:
2009
Book Details
Book Quality:
Publisher Quality
ISBN-13:
9780813928371
Related ISBNs:
9780813928296
Publisher:
University of Virginia Press
Date of Addition:
05/07/13
Copyrighted By:
the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia
