Influences on Judicial Decisions: Legal, Personal, Ideological, and Political Factors
One internal factor that influences judicial decisions is individual judges’ personal beliefs and ideologies. Judges are not entirely objective and impartial; they have their own beliefs, values, and biases. These personal beliefs can shape their interpretation and application of the law and ultimately influence their decision-making process.
For example, in the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize abortion was influenced by the personal beliefs and ideologies of the majority of the justices (Perry, 1). The Court’s decision was based on interpreting the 14th Amendment’s right to privacy, but opinions varied considerably among the justices. Some justices believed in a woman’s right to choose, while others believed in the protection of unborn life. These personal beliefs played a significant role in shaping the case’s outcome.
Implications for Individuals Navigating the Court System
The influence of personal beliefs and ideologies in judicial decisions can affect people going through the court system. If a judge’s personal beliefs align with the party or individual involved in a case, they may be more likely to rule in their favor. Conversely, if a judge’s personal beliefs conflict with the party or individual involved, they may be more likely to rule against them (Perry, 1). As a result, it is possible to observe unequal treatment under the law and undermine the principle of impartiality.
Comparing the Recognition of State and Federal Courts in Policymaking
It is also important to note that state courts are not as widely acknowledged for their policymaking abilities as federal courts, mainly due to the Supreme Court’s reputation as the highest judicial authority. The decisions of the Supreme Court have a binding effect on all lower courts, including state courts, meaning that state courts are often bound to follow the precedent set by the Supreme Court, limiting their ability to make independent policy decisions (Perry, 1). For example, if a state court wants to challenge a Supreme Court decision, it would require a lengthy and expensive legal process to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court itself. This situation makes it difficult for state courts to significantly impact policymaking, as the decisions of the higher federal courts often bind them.
Source
Alice Elizabeth Perry. 2020. Federal and State Court Systems: Analysis of History Making Legal Precedent. Cognella Academic Publishing.