Replication data for: The Nature of Legal Change on the U.S. Supreme Court: Jurisprudential Regimes Theory and Its Alternatives
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Jurisprudential regimes theory (JRT) posits that legal change on the U.S. Supreme Court occurs in a drastic, structural-break-like manner. Methodological debates present conflicting evidence for JRT, which has implications for the important law versus ideology debate. We confront this debate by first elaborating two alternative theoretical perspectives to JRT -- evolutionary change and legal stability. Our analytical framework focuses on two key substantive effects of jurisprudential categories on the Court's case outcomes -- relative differences between categories over multiple time periods and longitudinal differences across time periods. Importantly, different pieces of empirical evidence can provide support for different dynamic processes. The extent to which law matters is not necessarily tied to one particular model of legal change' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["Judicial decision making","Jurisprudential regimes theory","Legal change","Politics","U.S. Supreme Court"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'Jurisprudential regimes theory (JRT) posits that legal change on the U.S. Supreme Court occurs in a drastic, structural-break-like manner. Methodological debates present conflicting evidence for JRT, which has implications for the important law versus ideology debate. We confront this debate by first elaborating two alternative theoretical perspectives to JRT -- evolutionary change and legal stability. Our analytical framework focuses on two key substantive effects of jurisprudential categories on the Court's case outcomes -- relative differences between categories over multiple time periods and longitudinal differences across time periods. Importantly, different pieces of empirical evidence can provide support for different dynamic processes. The extent to which law matters is not necessarily tied to one particular model of legal change' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
Jurisprudential regimes theory (JRT) posits that legal change on the U.S. Supreme Court occurs in a drastic, structural-break-like manner. Methodological debates present conflicting evidence for JRT, which has implications for the important law versus ideology debate. We confront this debate by first elaborating two alternative theoretical perspectives to JRT -- evolutionary change and legal stability. Our analytical framework focuses on two key substantive effects of jurisprudential categories on the Court's case outcomes -- relative differences between categories over multiple time periods and longitudinal differences across time periods. Importantly, different pieces of empirical evidence can provide support for different dynamic processes. The extent to which law matters is not necessarily tied to one particular model of legal change
Judicial decision making; Jurisprudential regimes theory; Legal change; Politics; U.S. Supreme Court