Abstract
There has been an increasing tendency in recent years for students of judicial behavior to broaden the scope of their studies beyond the traditional concentration on the U.S. Supreme Court. Since we have in the past known all too little about other courts, this trend can only be welcomed with enthusiasm, even though some doubts remain about the usefulness of the methodologies, and the conclusions. Professors Glick and Vines here report a segment of a study of four state supreme courts, in which they find that the differences in action between law-makers and law-interpreters are not as clear as one might have expected. Obviously, more work is needed on this subject.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
