This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Chilton, B. S. Articles by Woods, J. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Moral Justifications on the Rehnquist Court

Hercules, Herbert, and "Druggies" Under the Fourth Amendment

Appalachian State University

James A. Woods

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

What moral justifications do we find in Fourth Amendment judicial opinions of the Rehnquist Court, and what does this suggest about future Court decision making? First, the authors develop the moral justification model of judicial decision making in a literature review, with linguistic patterns and categories by Hercules and Herbert for content analysis. Second, they discuss the methodological strategies used in this content analysis of official opinions of the Court on the Fourth Amendment from 1986 to 1994. Third, from this content analysis, the authors describe the patterns of moral justification in Rehnquist Court Fourth Amendment opinions, including the Court’s assessments of the moral virtue of "druggie" defendants. Finally, they draw conclusions from this analysis for a moral science of the politics of law.

Key Words: Rehnquist Court • Fourth Amendment • moral justifications

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 17, No. 3, 343-361 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0887403405284859


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?