Studies of the Supreme Court consistently show that the Office of the Solicitor General enjoys remarkable success before the Supreme Court, both at the certiorari stage and at the merits stage. These studies offer a variety of explanations for Solicitor General success, but fail to portray accurately the Office of the Solicitor General and to account for variations in governmental success. This paper seeks to continue the exploration of governmental success. By looking at the Office of the Solicitor General as a series of individuals with distinct characteristics rather than as a single entity, and by accounting for various situational dynamics, I attempt to explain the variations in executive success.

A Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 elevou a saúde como direito social fundamental e constituiu o Sistema Único de Saúde com competência para as ações e serviços de saúde, incluídas as de vigilância sanitária. As ações e serviços da área formulam-se e implementam-se por intermédio de políticas públicas adotadas pelo Poder Público. As referidas políticas são programas de ação governamental que se valem de normas jurídicas e têm estimulado a reflexão dos juristas, em vista, especialmente, de frequentes decisões judiciais sobre políticas públicas, mais notadamente, nas de caráter social. Em vigilância sanitária há o estabelecimento de políticas públicas, por parte da União, que tem na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa) seu órgão executor, em nível federal. A Anvisa, para executar a política pública de vigilância sanitária, formula atos que regulam essa atividade. Tais atos, muitas vezes, são questionados judicialmente. Esta pesquisa analisou as decisões judiciais federais, entre os anos de 1999 e 2007, em que a Anvisa figurou no pólo passivo da relação processual, com o intuito de observar se o Poder Judiciário, ao decidir sobre essa importante matéria, leva em conta o código binário Direito Sanitário/Não Direito Sanitário da Teoria dos Sistemas Sociais de Niklas Luhmann ou o ignora, formulando sentenças baseadas em outras fontes que não o Direito Sanitário e a política pública de vigilância sanitária. Concluiu-se que o Poder Judiciário federal, embora pouco versado em matéria de saúde pública, deixa-se influenciar pela compreensão de vigilância sanitária e de risco sanitário e tem julgado, em maioria, a favor da saúde / The 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil has given health a fundamental social right status and also has created a centralized health system called SUS which is responsible, among other subjects, for health surveillance services. In Brazil, actions and health services are created and implemented as public policies. Those are government actions and programs supported by laws that have been stimulating lawyers to speculate about the subject, notably because of numerous court decisions in public policies, especially those with a social character. In Brazil, health surveillance is jurisdiction of federal government through the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). This agency in order to implement public policies in health surveillance enforces acts to regulate such activities. However, such acts are often challenged in court. In order to determine if Judiciary decisions takes into account Health Law / Not Health law Niklas Luhmann\'s binary system or simply ignores the subject resulting in sentences based on other sources but Health Law and health surveillance public policy. The conclusion was that Federal Judiciary has decided mostly in favor of health, although not much experienced in public health matters they are influenced by health surveillance and health hazard notions

Submitted by Fabricia Fialho Reginato (fabriciar) on 2015-06-27T01:35:46Z No. of bitstreams: 1 GuilhermeFeldens.pdf: 1528101 bytes, checksum: a23634d266eb33989f293ebba6206ac6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-06-27T01:35:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 GuilhermeFeldens.pdf: 1528101 bytes, checksum: a23634d266eb33989f293ebba6206ac6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-08-11 / Nenhuma / O senso de justiça é um dos elementos essenciais para a criação de uma comunidade justa e democrática nos moldes apresentados em A theory of justice. A virada política de Rawls, centrada na análise da estabilidade social e da legitimidade do poder diante a pluralidade de concepções morais presentes nas sociedades atuais, não eliminou totalmente a importância do senso de justiça na justificação pública proposta em Political liberalism. Nesse sentido, afirma-se que a moralidade em Rawls tem uma função social, pois visa defender o indivíduo frente à sociedade sem ter a coerção externa como principal fonte de motivação para cumprir seus preceitos. A partir desse quadro, o presente trabalho objetiva demonstrar que Rawls apresenta uma concepção de Direito embasada em princípios de justiça expressos no acordo Constitucional. Rawls garante um modelo de sistema jurídico afastado do positivismo jurídico e do utilitarismo, capaz de garantir um sentido democrático diferente, afastado da mera tentativa de legitimação da autoridade política através de um discurso normativo. Por fim, conclui-se que tal modelo garante uma atividade jurisdicional caracterizada pela responsabilidade de manter os princípios de justiça aceitos por todos os cidadãos no acordo constitucional. Dessa forma, as decisões relativas às questões sociais essenciais não serão influenciadas por interesses de maiorias transitórias, nem pelas concepções morais individuais dos julgadores, respeitando a coerência de um sistema de justiça construído a partir de juízos democráticos. / The sense of justice is one of the essential elements for the creation of a fair and democratic community as presented in A theory of justice. Rawls's political shift, focusing on the analysis of social stability and legitimacy of power before the plural moral concepts present in current societies, has not totally eliminated the relevance of the sense of justice in the public justification proposed in Political liberalism. In this sense, it is said that morality in Rawls has a social function, once it aims at defending the individual before society without external coercion as a main source of motivation to fulfill its precepts. Based on this picture, the purpose of this study is to show that Rawls presents a concept of Law based on principles of justice expressed in the constitutional settlement. Rawls establishes a model for the legal system distant from legal positivism and utilitarianism, one that is capable of assuring a different democratic sense, distant from the mere attempt to legitimize political authority through a normative discourse. Finally, it is concluded that such model assures a jurisdictional activity characterized by the responsibility to make all citizens in the constitutional settlement accept the justice criteria. Thus, decisions regarding essential social issues shall not be influenced by interests of the transient majorities, nor by the individual moral conceptions of the judges, this way respecting the coherence of a legal system built on democratic judgments.

A Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 elevou a saúde como direito social fundamental e constituiu o Sistema Único de Saúde com competência para as ações e serviços de saúde, incluídas as de vigilância sanitária. As ações e serviços da área formulam-se e implementam-se por intermédio de políticas públicas adotadas pelo Poder Público. As referidas políticas são programas de ação governamental que se valem de normas jurídicas e têm estimulado a reflexão dos juristas, em vista, especialmente, de frequentes decisões judiciais sobre políticas públicas, mais notadamente, nas de caráter social. Em vigilância sanitária há o estabelecimento de políticas públicas, por parte da União, que tem na Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa) seu órgão executor, em nível federal. A Anvisa, para executar a política pública de vigilância sanitária, formula atos que regulam essa atividade. Tais atos, muitas vezes, são questionados judicialmente. Esta pesquisa analisou as decisões judiciais federais, entre os anos de 1999 e 2007, em que a Anvisa figurou no pólo passivo da relação processual, com o intuito de observar se o Poder Judiciário, ao decidir sobre essa importante matéria, leva em conta o código binário Direito Sanitário/Não Direito Sanitário da Teoria dos Sistemas Sociais de Niklas Luhmann ou o ignora, formulando sentenças baseadas em outras fontes que não o Direito Sanitário e a política pública de vigilância sanitária. Concluiu-se que o Poder Judiciário federal, embora pouco versado em matéria de saúde pública, deixa-se influenciar pela compreensão de vigilância sanitária e de risco sanitário e tem julgado, em maioria, a favor da saúde / The 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil has given health a fundamental social right status and also has created a centralized health system called SUS which is responsible, among other subjects, for health surveillance services. In Brazil, actions and health services are created and implemented as public policies. Those are government actions and programs supported by laws that have been stimulating lawyers to speculate about the subject, notably because of numerous court decisions in public policies, especially those with a social character. In Brazil, health surveillance is jurisdiction of federal government through the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). This agency in order to implement public policies in health surveillance enforces acts to regulate such activities. However, such acts are often challenged in court. In order to determine if Judiciary decisions takes into account Health Law / Not Health law Niklas Luhmann\'s binary system or simply ignores the subject resulting in sentences based on other sources but Health Law and health surveillance public policy. The conclusion was that Federal Judiciary has decided mostly in favor of health, although not much experienced in public health matters they are influenced by health surveillance and health hazard notions

The diploma thesis „Circumstances and Legal Consequences of Daytime Road Accidents with Pedestrian“ deals with the interpretation of legal decisions on traffic accidents causes by the vehicle during the day and where the other participant was a pedestrian. The main aim of this work is to find the established limits for the assessment of fault in comparable accident situations. Basic concepts, as a traffic accident, participants of traffic accidents and the position of an expert in the criminal proceedings, are defined within the theoretical part of the thesis. It also deals with the biomechanical aspects of a pedestrian – vehicle collision and the violation of specific regulations. Approximately 1,530 judical decisions were studied and analyzed in the analytical part, of which 40 were selected, that correspond to the requirements of this thesis. In the analytical part there are also 4 expert opinions provided by the Institute of Forensic Engineering of Brno University of Technology, where the above – mentioned limits for the assessment of accidents were applied, as well as the decision according to the jurisdiction.

This study examines the agenda setting and decision-making behavior of the United States Supreme Court from 1888 to 1989.

No description available.

No description available.

Despite well documented evidence that both the level and diversity of amicus participation in state high courts have been growing, we know little about whether or under what conditions amicus briefs have an impact on court outcomes. This dissertation investigates how interest groups attempt to influence state supreme courts through their participation as amicus curiae. Using an original dataset assembled from content analysis of more than 2300 state supreme court decisions handed down between 1995 and 2010 and spanning three distinct areas of law - products liability, environmental law, and free speech/expression - I find that amicus briefs submitted by interest groups have the most influence over judicial outcomes in areas of law where interest groups routinely make large-scale donations to judicial campaigns. These results raise serious concerns about the influence of big money in judicial elections. The second part of this dissertation tests two competing theories of amicus influence to determine how state high court judges utilize amicus brief information in judicial decision making. The informational theory assumes the influence of amicus brief information to be evenly distributed across judges. However, theories of confirmation bias and motivated reasoning suggest that the information in amicus briefs may be received and evaluated differently depending upon the ideological predispositions of individual judges. Using multi-level modeling, I analyze the votes of more than 12,000 individual state high court judges to determine whether judge ideology conditions the influence of amicus briefs such that judges are more receptive to pro-attitudinal information contained in briefs from interest groups that share their predispositions. Results suggest that method of judicial retention and area of case law structures the mechanism of amicus brief influence. Amicus briefs appear to play an informational role in complex areas of case law but the presence of competitive judicial elections appear to alter the mechanism of amicus brief influence such that judicial responsiveness to amicus briefs is more closely tied to the reelection and campaign fundraising considerations of individual judges. The final portion of this dissertation investigates the case-level and court-level factors that attract interest group participation as amicus curiae in state high courts in order to better our understanding of interest group strategies when engaging state judiciaries. This paper tests the hypothesis that groups strategically target cases that will best serve the policy and institutional interests of the group, while focusing group resources on cases and courts where they are most likely to be successful. Results indicate that both liberal and conservative groups target state high courts that are elected through competitive and retention election processes rather than those that are appointed, suggesting that interest groups believe their influence will be greater with judges who are accountable to the public. Results also show that both liberal and conservative groups target courts from states that are ideologically sympathetic, but not necessarily from courts that are ideologically similar. / Political Science

Since 2001, the legislation on enforcement has been fundamentally changed, on 1st 2001, Act No. 120/2001 Coll., Executors and Enforcement Activities (Enforcement Code) entered into force. The creditor has thus been given the opportunity to decide how recover his claim. Until then, his only possibility for recovering claims was through the court, but since this date he could acquire his rights through the services of a distrainer. In 2012, this duality was abolished and is executed in most cases by private distrainer. He carries out his activity for reward, which results in his status as an entrepreneur. And his reward has been a thorny issue since 2001, when the profession came into our systhem. The issue of this topic is also evidenced by the parliamentary bill, which tries to regulate to reduce the distrainer`s tariff. The thesis compares the current situation in the Czech Republic with selected states. For purposes of this thesis, I chose Germany, because there is recovery of debts through a state employee, France because this system is one of the oldest and served as a model for many states and Slovakia, for reasons of common history and amendment that came into force in April this year. The aim of the thesis is to map the situation in selected states, to find possible deviations and sources of inspiration for the system of executive services in the territory of the Czech Republic.