Executive orders are a significant source of presidential power although scholars disagree on the nature of that power. It has been argued that executive orders are an indication of a president's failure to persuade others to act as he desires; others contend that executive orders offer "power without persuasion." This dissertation introduces the conditional model of executive order issuance and duration in order to offer a synthesis to these competing views, and to offer a better understanding of the opportunities and constraints faced by the president when choosing to act unilaterally through executive orders. The conditional theory holds that both the issuance and duration of executive orders is a function of the president's ideological proximity to Congress and the Supreme Court, and the availability of fresh policy space.

The question of whether increased funding pursuant to equity and adequacy court decisions has improved academic performance of at-risk students has sparked a lively and spirited debate. The landmark New Jersey case of Abbott v. Burke has been at the center of this debate. In Abbott, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that students in twenty-eight (28) “special needs” districts must receive the same funding per pupil as students in the two highest socio-economic district factor groups in the State. 149 N.J. 145 (1997) (Abbott IV). The question of whether the redistribution of State aid pursuant to Abbott IV has been efficiently and effectively managed has dominated public policy debates on education in New Jersey for the last two decades. The research questions are: 1. Did the court orders in Abbott v. Burke and subsequent reform policies adopted by the state in response to these orders increase funding and resources for economically disadvantaged students in the Abbott districts? 2. Have increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reached students in the classroom through enhanced instruction and student support services? 3. Have Abbott v. Burke and ensuing State reform policies improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged students as compared to analogous low socioeconomic and working-class students in districts that are not covered by the court decision? 4. Have a specific set of programs and reforms, including intensive early literacy programs in the elementary grades mandated by the State pursuant to Abbott v. Burke been effective for at-risk students in Abbott districts? My study proceeds from descriptive analyses of revenues by source and expenditures per pupil by function to quasi-experimental models. My primary causal analyses involved applying a difference-in-differences (DD) approach using expenditures per pupil, student teacher ratio, state standardized assessment scores for fourth, eighth, and eleventh grade; SAT Verbal and Math district averages; and Graduating with the Class as outcomes. My secondary causal analyses entailed a comparative interrupted time series (CITS) approach using state standardized assessment scores for eleventh grades, SAT scores, graduation rates, and post high plans as outcomes. After an exhaustive study, wherein I built one of the most comprehensive district-level databases in the nation and utilized over twenty-five measures, I find that Abbott v. Burke as an intervention has strong positive effects on education spending, student performance (in the early stages), and the learning environment. Abbott v. Burke had a strong positive effect on education spending from the time the seminal case was decided in 1997 up until to the present date. The fact that Abbott districts are expending more on student support services per pupil in FY 17 than all other socio-economic districts across the State in raw dollars ($2,477) and on a percentage basis (12.7 percent) indicates that increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reach students through enhanced student support services. In New Jersey, increased funding and reform policies pursuant to the line of Abbott v. Burke court decisions has improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged student in the Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic and working-class non-Abbott districts. The DD model suggests that Abbott IV increased the proficiency levels on fourth grade reading assessments of Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 (p<0.01). The DD model suggests that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “high and medium implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. In a confirmation that the IEL program is effective, the DD model also implies that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “low implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. Abbott IV increased the number of students in Abbott districts enrolling in two-year colleges as compared to low socioeconomic or working class districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 means that Abbott students are more cognizant of the opportunities to attend college.

The influence of corporate money in politics is one of the most studied topics in political science in the U.S., although not so much so in recent democracies. Using new and public data from Brazilian elections, this dissertation investigates the process of institutional change that culminated in a 2015 decision by the Brazilian Supreme Court to ban corporate donations as a legal source of financing to politicians and parties. The episode exemplifies the worldwide tendency of judicialization of politics and fits the pattern of change identified by the literature as a critical juncture, understood as a relatively short period of time in which there is a heightened probability that agents' choices will affect the outcome of interest. Under exceptional circumstances of political and economic crisis, actors not institutionally in charge of law making set in motion a process of legislative change whose final outcome was not a faithful reflection of their preferences, but was deeply influenced by contingent elements. Public support in a context of severe revelations of corruption schemes explain how the Supreme Court was able to rule against the immediate interest of politicians and how the latter, having adjusted to find additional sources of money, were unwilling to reinstate corporate donation as a legal means of campaign financing. Having confirmed in Chapter two that incumbency is associated in Brazil with a negative effect on the electoral performance of office holders while the use of corporate money by candidates is legal, the dissertation examines the effects of the Supreme Court decision on municipal elections held after it came into effect. We investigate whether removing this important source of funding for both incumbents and challengers swings the balance in favor of office holders in both majority and proportional elections held in 2016. We find evidence that the ban on corporate donations favored incumbent mayors, suggesting that the historic decision, instead of levelling the playing field between incumbents and challengers, in reality helped office holders to win an additional term. It was not immediately visible due to the particular conditions in which the 2016 elections took place, when voters were particularly angry at incumbents due to the widespread news of corruption involving party officials. These findings indicate that, despite its intention to make Brazilian elections more competitive and open, the historic Supreme Court decision might have had the exact opposite effect, helping perpetuate in power politicians already in office.

1 Abstract My master's thesis is focused on analysis of extraordinary appeal in criminal procedure. Extraordinary appeal is one of extraordinary remedial measures which was introduced into the Czech Criminal Procedure Code with effect from 1 January 2002. The thesis is devided into 6 chapters and the main chapter of the thesis is focused on in-depth analysis of the grounds of an extraordinary appeal and the issue of so called extreme discrepancy. So far, the issue of so called extreme discrepancy has not yet been subject to in-depth analysis in professional literature, therefore I pay more attention to this matter. The importance of so called extreme discrepancy is significant for the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic and its decisions. It is a concept arising from the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, which extends the grounds of an extraordinary appeal despite the grounds laid down in the Czech Criminal Procedure Code. Based on this concept the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic is obliged not only to review questions of law but also questions of fact in cases with so called extreme discrepancy. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic defends this concept saying it is neccessary to keep this approach in order to respect the fair trail within the meaning of the European...

The Role of the Grand Chambers of the Supreme Courts and of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court in Judicial Law-Making Abstract Grand Chambers (GCs) are considered to be the most authoritative judicial bodies within multi-panel supreme courts. They are said to secure the unity, continuity, and quality of these courts' decision making. This thesis explores these claims in relation to GCs of three Czech highest courts - the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court, and the Constitutional Court. What is the role of the GCs in the decision-making of these Courts and how do the GCs fulfil their role? The thesis addresses these questions from both doctrinal and empirical angles. Doctrinally, it analyses with respect to all three courts the criteria for selecting GC cases, the character of GC decisions, and the status of GC precedents. Empirically, it explores how many and what type of cases the case-selection mechanism generates and how the GC's decisions influence the decision- making of other Court formations. On the basis of this analysis, the main argument of the thesis is that courts' use of GCs influences the way the multi-panel courts develop the law. The three key parameters of any GC that the thesis identifies are (i) the justification of its authority, (ii) the means of asserting its authority...

Interpretation of labour law regulations in the case law of The Supreme Court of the Czech Republic Abstract This thesis examines eight rulings of The Supreme Court of the Czech Republic that were handpicked for their extraordinary relevance in labour law. The author of this thesis attempts to find the solution to the problems solved by The Supreme Court in these rulings and then compares his reasoning and conclusions with the ones provided by The Supreme Court while evaluating the validity of the court's reasoning and conclusions along with whether The Supreme Court found its conclusions in a methodically sound manner. Rulings of cases No. 21 Cdo 4986/2010, 21 Cdo 224/2013, 21 Cdo 2745/2013, 21 Cdo 385/2014, 21 Cdo 5433/2014, 21 Cdo 3240/2015, 21 Cdo 1276/2016 and 21 Cdo 1276/2016 were the ones selected for analysis. The subject matter of the rulings listed above is as follows: When can an empoyer terminate a non- compete clause, whether or not specifying the applicable reason for termination in a medical opinion is needed in order to use said medical opinion as grounds for such termination, whether obstacle to work on the employee's part takes precedence over obstacle to work on the employer's part or vice versa, the relation between entitlement to severance pay and compensation provided by the Labour...

Hahlo and Khan have aptly described South African law as a ‘three-layered cake’. This dissertation is not so much concerned with the ingredients of the cake, but with the Cape Supreme Court which was used to ‘bake’ the third layer, and the judges who were employed to supervise the task. However, in order t wet the appetites of the legal gourmets, an attempt has been made to analyse the ingredient of judicial precedent, and to serve it up in the form of ‘icing’.

A determination was made of the degree to which the four requirements of Gault were met in District I of the Utah Juvenile Court between July l, 1967 and June 30, 1969. The requirements handed down in 1967 by the U. S. Supreme Court were as follows: (a) guarantee to the right of notice given to the juvenile himself and to his parents; (b) right to counsel , representation by counsel in juvenile delinquency proceedings; (c) right to confrontation and cross-examination by prosecuting witness; and (d) privilege against self- incrimination in juvenile delinquency proceedings. Observable procedures indicate that sustained effort is being made by District I, Utah, toward affording protection of basic legal rights to juvenile court clients and their families. However, the juvenile court records, as the source of information for this study, show the four requirements of Gault as being met only in part during the period of time specified. It was also found that, with only two changes, the Utah Juvenile Court Act of 1965 would have already been fulfilling, in Utah, the requirements provided by the subsequent 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision on Gault. These two recommended changes were, first, a provision requiring that it be recorded whether or not the child was notified of his rights; and second, that a provision be added to record the name of the complainant, his presence, and if his testimony was used during the proceeding.

Did interest groups influence the Supreme Court’s interpretation of federal economic regulatory authority under the Commerce Clause leading up to the Supreme Court’s 1937 reversal? Recent scholarship has begun a renewed study of this tumultuous era seeking alternative explanations for the Court’s behavior beyond the conventional explanations concerning Roosevelt’s court packing plan. I build on this literature by extending the discussion to the influence that interest groups may have had on the Court. I propose that interest groups served as a supporting and influential audience for the Supreme Court as the justices’ institutional legitimacy became threatened by both the political pressure and legal changes that the Court faced during this era. To test these theoretical assumptions, I compiled a dataset of Supreme Court cases using the U.S. Supreme Court Library Official Reports Database ranging from the beginning of the 1920 Supreme Court term through the end of the 1937 term. Cases were included if 1) the case had one or more filed amicus briefs; and 2) the questions and arguments in the case were based on the Commerce Clause or legislation that relies wholly or in part on the Commerce Clause. Applying a basic logit model, I find support for the assumption that amicus briefs influenced the Court by providing the justices with a supporting audience. To further test the influence of amicus briefs, I compare the arguments and information provided exclusively by amicus briefs in this group of cases to the Supreme Court majority’s opinions to test for similar content. Amicus briefs are considered influential if the Court included information exclusively from an amicus in their majority opinion. I find that in the largest number of cases, amici influenced the Court majority’s opinions in favor of their preferred litigant when they provide unique arguments and information. Consequently, I find moderate support for the influence of interest groups on the Court both externally by providing a supporting audience and internally by providing the Court with supporting information.

No description available.