Research for Parts 3 & 4 of The Evolution of Debt Slavery in Modern Times
Research for Parts 3 and 4 of The Evolution of Debt Slavery In Modern Times HYPOTHESIS: Federal Judicial Department has consistently favored wealthy and privileged. Dahlia Lathwick, “This Court Erred: The Supreme Court has almost always sided with the wealthy, the privileged, and the powerful, a new book argues” Slate (September 30, 2014) reviewing 2014 book by Constitutional Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, The Case Against the Supreme Court Mark Galanter, “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change” Originally printed in Volume 9:1 Law and Sciety Review, 1974. Reprinted (with corrections) in R. Cotterrel (ed.) Law and Society, Altershot, Dartmouth, 1994, pp 165-230 ARTICLE:”Do the “Haves” Come Out Ahead over Time? Applying Galanter’s Framework to Decisions of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, 1925-1988”, 33 Law & Soc’y Rev. 811 (1999) https://advance.lexis.com/document/?pdmfid=1000516&crid=7bdcb108-b4c3-4fb9-b915-53f24da35294&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fanalytical-materials%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A417N-6260-00B1-909P-00000-00&pddocid=urn%3AcontentItem%3A417N-6260-00B1-909P-00000-00&pdcontentcomponentid=222560&pdteaserkey=sr12&ecomp=m4ntk&earg=sr12&prid=3920560a-63f7-43f9-8f5c-5dd6e1570fe2# This investigation examines the success of various types of litigants appearing before the U.S. Courts of Appeals from 1925 to 1988. The analysis parallels the earlier studies by Songer and Sheehan (1992) and Wheeler et al. (1987) that applied the core concepts introduced by Galanter’s groundbreaking analysis of why the “haves” come out ahead to study litigant success on the U.S. Courts of Appeals and state courts of last resort. The findings suggest that repeat player litigants with substantial organizational strength (“haves“) are much more likely to win in the federal courts of appeals than one-shot litigants with fewer resources. The “haves” win more frequently in published decisions, … Continue Reading