Page 26 - UCP_Template01_Sample
P. 26

1
                                                                                              2
                                                                                              3
                                                                                              4
                                                                                              5
                                                                                              6
                                                                                              7
                                                                                              8
                                                                                              9
                  Appendix A                                                                  10

                  Coding Procedures for Polarization Analysis                                 11
                                                                                              12
                                                                                              13
                    n the text and notes of chapters 1 and 2 I cite several hundred decisions   14
                  Iissued by state or federal courts on the issues of abortion, affirmative   15
                  action, gay rights, and gun rights from January 1993 through August 2013.   16
                  For the polarization analysis presented in chapter 3, I coded all such deci-  17
                  sions that were issued by the Supreme Court of the United States, a federal   18
                  appellate court, or a state high court. These decisions are listed in appen-  19
                  dix B (available at http://press.uchicago.edu/0000000000000000000).         20
                     The list includes all decisions from chapters  1 and  2 that had close   21
                  legal and/or political connections to the issues noted above. For example,   22
                  it includes Hill v. Colorado (2000) and Doe v. Reed (2010), which were      23
                  formally First Amendment free speech holdings but which emerged out         24
                  of legal and political conflicts regarding abortion and domestic partner-   25
                  ships, respectively. The list excludes decisions involving unrelated issues   26
                  that are cited in the text simply to illustrate some general point about law   27
                  and courts. For example, it excludes National Federation of Independent     28
                  Businesses v. Sebelius (2012), in which the Supreme Court upheld most       29
                  provisions of the Affordable Care Act, and which is cited in chapter 2      30
                  to illustrate that elected officials sometimes pursue litigation when other   31
                  avenues of policy change are closed off.                                    32
                     For the federal appellate courts, I coded the party of the appointing    33
                  president for judges who participated in all decisions issued by three-     34
                  judge panels and most decisions issued by en banc panels. In the latter     35
                  category, the published opinions sometimes indicate individual judges’      36
                  votes by name and, at other times, provide enough detail to allow a recon-  37
                  struction of individual judges’ votes; where neither of these conditions    38
                  holds, I left the cases uncoded. For the SCOTUS holdings, I coded the       39











 UCP_Fischel_FM.indd              22                                         Achorn International                          05/21/2009  02:08PM  UCP_Fischel_FM.indd              23                                         Achorn International                          05/21/2009  02:08PM
   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31