For the coding of the case salience variable, I relied on Epstein and article on The authors utilized the Index to the and LEXIS to Measuring Issue Salience. New York Times create the measure. A salient case (1) led to a story on the front page of the Times on the NYT day after the Court handed it down, (2) was the lead or case in the story, and (3) was “headline” orally argued and decided with an opinion (p.73). Vanessa Baird (2004) claimed that the New York Times was a valid measure of contemporaneous evaluations of the case’s political salience. According to Beverly Cook (1993), a minimum of two authorities must be utilized in order for a case to be considered salient to accept a single authority would introduce idiosyncratic “since standards.” Moreover, Cook analyzed 15 different measures and found that the list compiled by Congressional Quarterly was a concise but a authority for research on contemporary “reliable decisions” (Cook 1993, 1136). Although Harold Spaeth has utilized the Lawyers Edition to identify significant non-constitutional cases, Cook claims that the Lawyers Edition is a questionable source due to the lack of identifiable scholars who take responsibility for the cases selected. Brenner and Arrington (2002) evaluated the usefulness of both the and lists for NYT CQ the purposes of measuring salience on the Court. They found that cases on both lists were more likely to be salient than cases on only one list. The moderate judicial scale will now be examined descriptively to identify moderate characteristics and traits. This is not the first study to gauge the level of case salience with two distinct indexes. As somewhat similar to previous research, I classified cases as salient”, if they appeared in “highly the and are listed in list of major cases. Both Epstein New York Times Congressional Quarterly’s & Segal (2000) and Baird (2004) measured issue salience by relying solely on the basis of the front page of the New York Times. However, Brenner & Arrington (2002) concluded that a researcher who wants a short list of the most salient cases might select the cases that appear on
For the coding of the case salience variable, I relied on Epstein and article on Measuring Issue Salience. The authors utilized the Index to the New York Times and LEXIS to create the NYT measure. A salient case (1) led to a story on the front page of the Times on the day after the Court handed it down, (2) was the lead or “headline” case in the story, and (3) was orally argued and decided with an opinion (p.73). Vanessa Baird (2004) claimed that the New York Times was a valid measure of contemporaneous evaluations of the case’s political salience. According to Beverly Cook (1993), a minimum of two authorities must be utilized in order for a case to be considered salient “since to accept a single authority would introduce idiosyncratic standards.” Moreover, Cook analyzed 15 different measures and found that the list compiled by Congressional Quarterly was a concise but a “reliable authority for research on contemporary decisions” (Cook 1993, 1136). Although Harold Spaeth has utilized the Lawyers Edition to identify significant non-constitutional cases, Cook claims that the Lawyers Edition is a questionable source due to the lack of identifiable scholars who take responsibility for the cases selected. Brenner and Arrington (2002) evaluated the usefulness of both the NYT and CQ lists for the purposes of measuring salience on the Court. They found that cases on both lists were more likely to be salient than cases on only one list. The moderate judicial scale will now be examined descriptively to identify moderate characteristics and traits. This is not the first study to gauge the level of case salience with two distinct indexes. As somewhat similar to previous research, I classified cases as “highly salient”, if they appeared in the New York Times and are listed in Congressional Quarterly’s list of major cases. Both Epstein & Segal (2000) and Baird (2004) measured issue salience by relying solely on the basis of the front page of the New York Times. However, Brenner & Arrington (2002) concluded that a researcher who wants a short list of the most salient cases might select the cases that appear on
ModerateBehaviorontheRobertsCourtbyPaulFoote.docx