Footnotes (13)



Institutional Considerations in Locating Norms of Consensus: A Cross-National Investigation

Rebecca D. Gill

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

April 4, 2008

This paper is an investigation of the judicial norm of consensus in four national high courts: the High Court of Australia, the Supreme Court of Canada, the South African Supreme Court of Appeals (and Constitutional Court) and the House of Lords (Law Lords) in the United Kingdom. Research on consensual norms in the U.S. Supreme Court is outlined first. Then, after reviewing the methods of cointegration and suggesting an alternative to the Caldeira and Zorn (1998) procedure, this paper will explore the applicability of these methods to the location of consensual norms in different institutional contexts. Specifically, the importance of opinion-writing tradition and institutional legitimacy will be highlighted. Finally, aggregated opinion-writing data for each court will be analyzed. The results illustrate the importance of considering institutional variations when searching for evidence of consensual norms cross-nationally.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 30

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: July 17, 2008  

Suggested Citation

Gill, Rebecca D., Institutional Considerations in Locating Norms of Consensus: A Cross-National Investigation (April 4, 2008). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1161155 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1161155

Contact Information

Rebecca D. Gill (Contact Author)
University of Nevada, Las Vegas ( email )
4505 S. Maryland Pkwy. Box 455029
Las Vegas, NV NV 89154
United States
7028952525 (Phone)
7028951065 (Fax)
HOME PAGE: http://www.rebeccagill.net
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 332
Downloads: 44
Footnotes:  13

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.188 seconds