How Judges Think: The Nine Theories Of Judicial Behavior

1189 Words5 Pages
The making of a decision is always composed of opinions, beliefs, and past results. Analyzing a particular decision and its effect on individuals or groups is simple to evaluate. However, understanding the premise, process, and thought needed to compile these conclusions is far more complex. Such is the case with Judges and their forms of judicial behavior that lead them into forming conclusions. Political and legal theorist have tormented themselves trying to figure out how judges really behave. According to Richard Posner in How Judges Think, there are nine theories that help explain how Judges think and come up with decisions. The nine theories of judicial behavior include; the attitudinal, the strategic, the sociological, the psychological, the economic, the organizational, the pragmatic, the phenomenological, and the legalist. These theories are the foundation for judicial decision making which allows us to understand the rationale behind these outcomes.…show more content…
Since both the executive branch and the President of the United States hold the power to appoint federal and supreme court judges, it is highly likely they will appoint judges who share their same political views and attitude. The attitudinal theory essentially demonstrates if a judge's decision is influenced by the president's political background. This theory is used to see if appointed judges will in fact act under the political ideology of the president who appointed them and carries out their
Open Document