• 00:01    |    
    Initial credits
  • 00:20    |    
    Rule of law and consistency
    • Inconsistent Supreme Court decisions
    • Dishonoring precedents
    • Stare decisis
    • Dishonest judges
    • Incompetent judges
    • Court inconsistency is inevitable
  • 05:21    |    
    Causes of court inconsistency
  • 05:36    |    
    • First Amendment of the United States Constitution
      • Justices' interpretation of Establishment Clause
      • Consistent and independent justices
      • Absolutist theory
      • Neutrality thesis
      • Balancing test
      • Inconsistency
      • Allocation of preferences
      • No common agreement
      • What about dissents?
    • Conditions for cycling
      • More than two positions
      • Multi-peaked preferences
      • What would happen if they don't agree with the second and third options?
      • How justices arrive at their decisions
    • Rule of precedent
      • Shields justices from reconsidering previous rules
      • "Legal Precedent: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis," William Landes and Richard Posner
      • Three or more positions
  • 21:40.5    |    
    Path dependency
    • Right of privacy
      • Abortion
      • Sexual conduct between consenting adults
    • If the order of the decisions was reversed
    • Abandonment of n stare decisis
    • Is there never a departure from precedent once one view has been taken?
  • 28:21.5    |    
    Strategic voting
    • Dishonesty
    • Strategic results
    • Cure for cycling
    • Internally inconsistent judges
    • Justice John Paul Stevens
    • Violation of the rule of law
  • 34:28    |    
    Questions and comments period
    • Legal doctrine in the absence of precedent rules
      • The Brethren, Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong
      • Strategic voting consequences
    • Strategic voting discrepancies
    • Binding precedent and judges' criteria
    • Short appointments to the Guatemalan Supreme Court
      • Application of public choice theory
      • Separate constitutional system
      • No rule of precedent
      • Publishing judgments and opinions
      • [ LexisNexis] database
    • What do you think about interpretativism?
    • Do you support the doctrine of original understanding?
    • Function of the civil code
    • Can you discuss takings and the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution?
    • Constitutional basis for federal jurisdiction
      • United States v. Lopez
      • Oregon hardware store case, 1993
      • Changes in commerce jurisprudence
    • State police power
    • Legal and illegal issues in United States
  • 01:15:09    |    
    Final credits

Economic Analysis of Law and Public Choice (Part 8)

New Media  | 28 de julio de 1995  | Vistas: 355

About this video

In this lecture, Dr. Michael Krauss discusses the importance of consistency in the rule of law. He explores the causes of inconsistency in the United States Supreme Court: cycling, path dependency, and strategic voting. The conditions leading to cycling are the presence of more than two possible positions and multi-peaked preferences. Path dependency reveals the importance of the order in which cases are heard by the court. And strategic voting reveals dishonesty on the part of the judges.  Dr. Krauss wraps up the lecture by answering questions and commenting on some of the clauses in the United States Constitution.


Economic Analysis of Law and Public Choice (Part 8)
Dr. Michael Krauss

Universidad Francisco Marroquín
Guatemala, July 28, 1995
A New Media - UFM production. Guatemala, february 2009.
Conversion and digital editing: Mynor de León; index and synopsis: Christiaan Ketelaar; content reviser: Daphne Ortiz; publication: Mario Pivaral / Carlos Petz


Michael Krauss is a professor of law at George Mason University…