Abstract:The dominant social scientific approach to studying judicial behavior treats judges as strategic actors pursuing their political preferences under institutional constraint. The intellectual roots of this rational choice approach are in American law's long but sporadic engagement with pragmatist ideas. This article challenges that approach: a fully pragmatist account of judicial action provides a better description of the intellectual and social work of judging, and better explains how judges reach a decision in difficult cases that most affect the development of law and its relationship to society. The article argues that the foundational intellectual problem for appellate judges is how to define the legal questions presented in a case. Definitions of legal questions arise from the interplay of habitual and creative action in the local social context of an appeals court. Professional and local interpretive habits and legal forms ordinarily do a great deal to define the key questions, which are not strictly determined when a case comes before a court. Unscripted small group interactions at oral arguments also figure in question definition; oral arguments are most important in the rare but legally important cases where habitual practices alone are insufficient to delimit the legal question judges must answer. Supported by extensive interviews with federal appeals judges and clerks, the article illustrates judges' creative, interactional efforts to define an answerable question in a major asylum case decided in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Building from this case, the article describes the factors that shape judicial question definition, and describes the conditions when creative judicial action is likely to be most prominent.

The Value Choice and Rhetoric in Judicial Decision: Examples from Copyright Law

Idea-Expression Dichotomy Misread:A Legal Rhetorical Perspective

A Court Judgment As Dialogue

Methods on Rhetorical Proof——Discussion on Two Judgments

A Discursive Analytical Path of Appellate Court Opinions: Evaluation of Ideological Positioning in Bush V. Gore 2000

Moral Rights:The Jurisprudential Choice between Inherent Nature and Function Construction

On Value Evaluation in the Criminal Adjudication

Legal Argumentation: a Theoretic Myth of Judicial Process

On Ten Issues on the Formal Rationality of Law

Constitutional Interpretation and Value Evaluation Manners in Administrative Judgment

The Improving of the Acceptability of Judicial Decisions from the Perspective of Argumentative Rhetoric

Value Judgments in Criminal Law Interpretation

Judge's Strategy of Settling Lawsuits

Legal Techniques for Rationalizing Biased Judicial Decisions: Evidence from Experiments with Real Judges

Ethical Literary Criticism: On Fundamental Function and Core Value of Literature

Context Analysis of the "value Substance, Devalue Procedure" Thesis: on the Problem of Procedural Justice Incidentally

“Habit and creativity in judges’ definition and framing of legal questions”

Analyze the Value of the Constitutional Litigation

The Cornerstone of Western Communication Law Legislation --an Analysis of the Theory of "marketplace of Ideas"

The Appeal of Justical Value about Humanistic Supposition and Institutional Ethic

Law is an Art——on the Second Judgement of Xuting Case