{"id":134,"date":"2025-04-29T09:46:12","date_gmt":"2025-04-29T09:46:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/research-2\/"},"modified":"2025-06-11T10:10:28","modified_gmt":"2025-06-11T10:10:28","slug":"research","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/research\/","title":{"rendered":"Research"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n \n
\n
\n

Research<\/h2>\n
\n \"\"<\/span>\n <\/a>\n \"\"<\/span>\n <\/a>\n \"\"<\/span>\n <\/a>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n
\n
\n

Books <\/h1>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n The Emerging Republican Minorities: Racial and Ethnic Realignment in the Trump Era<\/a> (Bloomsbury, 2025) (with Idan Franco)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Producing Reproductive Rights: Determining Abortion Policy Worldwide<\/a> (Cambridge University Press 2019) (with Aliza Forman-Rabinovici<\/a>) \n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Legal Path Dependence and the Long Arm of the Religious State: Gay Rights and Sodomy Laws in a Comparative Perspective<\/a> (SUNY Press 2016) (with Victor Asal)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

\n A Supreme Agenda: Strategic Case Selection on the Supreme Court of the United States<\/a> (Palgrave-MacMillan 2014)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Home but Away: The Experience of Immigrant Israeli Parents in America<\/a> (2010)  (in Hebrew)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n The Emerging Republican Minorities: Racial and Ethnic Realignment in the Trump Era<\/a> (Bloomsbury, 2025) (with Idan Franco)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\"\"<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Producing Reproductive Rights: Determining Abortion Policy Worldwide<\/a> (Cambridge University Press 2019) (with Aliza Forman-Rabinovici<\/a>) \n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\"\"<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Legal Path Dependence and the Long Arm of the Religious State: Gay Rights and Sodomy Laws in a Comparative Perspective<\/a> (SUNY Press 2016) (with Victor Asal)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n \"\"\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n A Supreme Agenda: Strategic Case Selection on the Supreme Court of the United States<\/a> (Palgrave-MacMillan 2014)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n \"\"\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

\n Home but Away: The Experience of Immigrant Israeli Parents in America<\/a> (2010)  (in Hebrew)\n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n
\n
\n

Peer Reviewed Articles: <\/h1>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n
\n
\n

\n \n
Solidarity in question: activation of dormant political dispositions and Latino\nsupport for Trump in 2020\n <\/a>. 2024. European Political Science Review<\/i> (with Idan Fanco) 
\n
\n Environmental Peacebuilding: Moving beyond resolving\nViolence-Ridden conflicts to sustaining peace<\/a>. 2024. World Development<\/i> (with Francesca Fassbender) 
\n
\n Trump\u2019s African Americans? Racial resentment and Black support\nfor Trump in the 2020 elections<\/a>. 2023. Politics, Groups, and\nIdentities<\/i> (with Idan Franco) 
\n
\n The rise of companies in the cyber era and the pursuant shift\nin national security<\/a>. 2023. Political Science<\/i> (with Eviatar Matania\nand Nir Hassid) 
\n
\n Tech titans, cyber commons and the war in Ukraine: An incipient\nshift in international relations<\/a>. 2023. International Relations<\/i> (with Eviatar Matania) 
\n
\n Geographical analysis of political epidemiology: Spatial quantification of simultaneity between politics and pandemics<\/a>. 2023. Political Geography<\/i> 
\n
Using the sequence of events in 2020, we study simultaneity\nbetween political behavior and pandemics. Capitalizing on spatial\nquantification to untangle simultaneity between politics and pandemics with\ncounty as the basic territorial unit, we examine the politics-on-pandemic\nimpact from the outbreak to Election Day. The relations seem more directional\nthan bidirectional and limited in time. Bigdata for 250 M US citizens and tens\nof thousands of county-days indicate an initial partisan effect on the R reproduction\ncoefficient via a range of mobility types, which disappeared after the\noutbreak. Then, we quantify the opposite pandemic-on-politics pattern in the\nform of COVID-19\u2019s effect on the 2020 elections, with data for 150 M voters.\nOur spatial analyses offer scant support for simultaneity in the relations\nbetween political behavior and COVID-19. If there is an effect of pandemics on\npolitics, it is often insignificant and never of meaningful magnitude.
\n
\n The Political Ramifications of Judicial Institutions: Establishing a Link between Dobbs and Gender Disparities in the 2022 Midterms<\/a>. 2023. Socius<\/i> 
\n
In the American system of government, courts are designed to\noperate within the legal sphere, with limited political interference. Is it\npossible, though, that a behavior that is at the heart of the political process\ncan be influenced directly by a judicial decision? Focusing on voter\nregistration big data for the universe of voters in North Carolina around the\ntime of Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization, the authors assess the\nroles of gender, political party affiliation, and age in voter registration.\nNorth Carolina is the only state whose voter registry has the necessary\ngranularity over time and information needed. Women and Democrats were more\nlikely to register to vote after information about the ruling was released,\nsuggesting that Dobbs influenced their behavior. This effect on voter\nregistration gender gap was unique to June 2022, unlike previous midterm\nelection years (2014 and 2018). Interrupted time-series analyses lend further\nsupport to these findings. 
\n
\n Data from a one-stop-shop comprehensive cancer screening center<\/a>. 2023. Journal\nof Clinical Oncology<\/i> 
\n
PURPOSE 
Cancer is the second leading cause of death\nglobally. However, by implementing evidence-based prevention strategies,\n30%-50% of cancers can be detected early with improved outcomes. At the\nintegrated cancer prevention center (ICPC), we aimed to increase early\ndetection by screening for multiple cancers during one visit. 
METHODS 
Self-referred asymptomatic individuals, age 20-80 years, were included\nprospectively. Clinical, laboratory, and epidemiological data were obtained by\nmultiple specialists, and further testing was obtained based on symptoms,\nfamily history, individual risk factors, and abnormalities identified during\nthe visit. Follow-up recommendations and diagnoses were given as appropriate. 
RESULTS 
Between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2019, 8,618 men and 8,486\nwomen, average age 47.11 \u00b1 11.71 years, were screened. Of 259 cancers detected\nthrough the ICPC, 49 (19.8%) were stage 0, 113 (45.6%) stage I, 30 (12.1%)\nstage II, 25 (10.1%) stage III, and 31(12.5%) stage IV. Seventeen cancers were\nmissed, six of which were within the scope of the ICPC. Compared with the\nIsraeli registry, at the ICPC, less cancers were diagnosed at a metastatic\nstage for breast (none v 3.7%), lung (6.7% v 11.4%), colon (20.0% v 46.2%),\nprostate (5.6% v 10.5%), and cervical\/uterine (none v 8.5%) cancers. When\ncompared with the average stage of detection in the United States, detection\nwas earlier for breast, lung, prostate, and female reproductive cancers.\nPatient satisfaction rate was 8.35 \u00b1 1.85 (scale 1-10).
CONCLUSION 
We present a\nproof of concept study for a one-stop-shop approach to cancer screening in a\nmultidisciplinary outpatient clinic. We successfully detected cancers at an\nearly stage, which has the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality as well\nas offer substantial cost savings.
\n
\n Opportunistic legislation under a natural emergency: Grabbing government power in a democracy during COVID-19<\/a>. 2023. Regulation & Governance<\/i> 
\n
With increasingly frequent emergencies related to pandemics,\nclimate change, or any other as yet unforeseen disaster, it is imperative to\ndevelop our understanding of how opportunistic legislation and policy grabs may\nappear even in democracies. Circumventing a lengthy process of public debate\nand government regulation, declaration of emergency may be conducive to such\nopportunism. Underlying mechanisms may involve national interest groups,\nwhereby early in the pandemic a group quickly develops a messaging strategy\nfocused on broad public health concerns. This strategy is then implemented by\nstate affiliates lobbying local officials and mobilizing their supporters to\npush executive branch officials to effectuate restrictions. We examine\nstate-level abortion restrictions during the outbreak of COVID-19. Our\nQualitative Comparative Analyses indicate that at least in the political\ncontext of reproductive rights and under the emergency of COVID-19, it was\nlevel of emergency, levels of religiosity in the state and Republican dominance\nin government that strongly predicted the likelihood of opportunistic\nlegislation.
\n
\n Pandemic Politics: COVID-19 as a New Type of Political Emergency<\/a>. 2022. Political\nPsychology<\/i> (with Or Rappel-Kroyzer). 
\n
Does a state of emergency necessarily contract human\nbehavior? In times of security crises, for instance, citizens overcome their\ndivides. Our analysis explores the relationship between county-level\npartisanship in the United States during COVID-19 and mobility. We provide an\noriginal theoretical analysis to distinguish pandemic politics from politics in\ntimes of emergency as we had known them. Our framework helps reconcile previous\ncontradictory findings about this type of emergency politics. Such a frame is\nneeded as it has been a century since the last major global pandemic, and since\nCoronavirus may not be the last. There are five reasons to distinguish COVID-19\nfrom previously familiar types of emergency politics: psychological, national\nsentiments, policy-, elite-, and time-related. Our extensive mobility bigdata\n(462,115 county*days from March-August 2020) are uniquely informative about\npandemic politics. In times of pandemic, people literally vote with their feet\non government actions. The data are highly representative of the US population.\nAt the pandemic outbreak, our exploratory innovative analysis suggests,\npolitical divides are exacerbated. Later, with mixed messages about the plague\nfrom party leadership, such exceedingly partisan patterns dissipate. They make\nway to less politically-infused and more educationally, demographically and\neconomically driven behavior.
\n
\n Media Coverage and the Success of COVID-19 Response in Democracy<\/a>. 2022. Information\nTechnology & Politics<\/i> (with Or Rappel-Kroyzer).
\n
We examine how internet media outlets in key Anglo-American\ndemocracies differed under a similar external shock: the outbreak of the\nCOVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. COVID-19 posed a special challenge to\ndemocracy, juxtaposing it with alternative forms of government, which may be\nbetter positioned to deal with such a crisis. The online media, as the watchdog\nof democracy, played a key role. As the pandemic started to spread worldwide,\nthree democracies\u2014the USA, Canada and New Zealand\u2014were of particular interest.\nThe USA had the highest number of cases and deaths, considerably more than its\nneighbor to the north. NZ was the democracy that most effectively dealt with\nthe pandemic. We comprehensively study the coverage of the outbreak on the\ninternet website of a newspaper of record in each. Data were harvested for the\nuniverse of 27,089 articles published online between mid-February and early May\non the websites of the New York Times, New Zealand Herald and the Globe and\nMail. Natural learning processing and dependency parsing are the methods used\nto analyze the data. We find meaningful differences between the outlets in\ntiming, structure and content. Compared with their US counterpart, the online\nwatchdogs of democracy in Canada and NZ\u2014where COVID-19 politics were far more\neffective\u2014barked louder, clearer and two weeks earlier.
\n
\n Urban attributes and the spread of COVID-19: The effects of density, compliance and socio-political factors in Israel<\/a>. 2021. Science of the Total\nEnvironment<\/i> (with Nir Barak and Nir Mualem) 
\n
Current debates identifying urban population density as a\nmajor catalyst for the spread of COVID-19, and the praise for de-densification\nand urban sprawl that they entail, may have dire environmental consequences.\nJuxtaposing competing theories about the urban antecedents of COVID-19, our key\nargument is that urban political attributes overshadow the effects of cities\u2019\nspatial characteristics. This is true even when considering levels of\ncompliance with movement restrictions and controlling for demographic and\nsocio-economic conditions. Taking advantage of Israel as a living lab for\nstudying COVID-19, we examine 271 localities during the first 3 months of the\noutbreak in Israel, a country where over 90% of the population is urban. Rather\nthan density, we find social makeup and politics to have a critical effect.\nCities with some types of political minority groups, but not others, exhibit\nhigher infection rates. Compliance has a significant effect and density\u2019s\ninfluence on the spread of the disease is contingent on urban political\nattributes. We conclude with assessing how the relationship between the\npolitics of cities and the spread of contagious diseases sheds new light on\ntensions between neo-Malthusian sentiments and concerns about urban sprawl and\nenvironmental degradation.
\n
\n Norms and Political Payoffs in Supreme Court Recusals<\/a>. 2020. Political Behavior<\/i> (with Quan Li and Jonathan Parent) 
\n
In times when the public and scholarly debates around the\neffects of norms on political decision making are at their height\u2014and in light\nof the argument that government decisionmakers are now likelier than ever to\nput political payoffs above norms\u2014we examine this question in an institutional\nsetting where norms are expected to reign supreme: The Supreme Court. If\npolitics fail to trump norms, we posit, the Court should be the institutional\nsetting where this happens. We juxtapose randomly distributed health recusals\nwith discretionary recusals on the Supreme Court of the United States, to test\nthe predictions of a concise formal model predicting a central tendency where\npolitical payoffs would surpass norms even in courts. Findings from\nmultivariate regression models strongly suggest that even justices on the high\ncourt are not immune to the tendency to abandon norms when institutional\nsettings are conducive and with political payoffs sufficiently high. Political\npayoffs are brought to bear much earlier in the decision-making process than\npreviously thought, and way ahead of the decision on the merits. This has been\nthe case since the middle of the 20th Century.
\n
\n The Politicization of Women\u2019s Health and Wellbeing<\/a>. 2020. Sustainability<\/i> (with\nAliza Forman-Rabinovici) 
\n
The framers and advocates of the United Nations Sustainable\nDevelopment Goals face a unique challenge when it comes to the goals of\nSustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3, good health and wellbeing, as it concerns\nwomen\u2019s health. The health of women, and in particular reproductive rights,\nhave been politicized in the work of the UN. Forums of the UN have become a\nbattleground between those who would frame reproductive rights as a morality\npolicy versus those who frame them as a feminist policy. This problem is not\nnew to the organization\u2019s work. Indeed, it has been a challenge to the UN\u2019s\nability to promote women\u2019s health for years. This article explores how the\nframing of women\u2019s reproductive rights poses a unique challenge to implementing\nsome of the goals of SDG3, and in particular targets 3.1, 3.7, and 3.8. It also\noffers strategies to surmount the challenge with an example of a different\nintergovernmental organization that managed to overcome this issue.
\n
\n Can the Descriptive-Substantive Link Survive Beyond Democracy? The Policy Impact of Women Representatives<\/a>.  2020.  Democratization <\/i>(with Aliza\nForman-Rabinovici) 
\n
That women offer substantive representation in democratic\nsystems is well established. However, can they do so in partial or\nnon-democracies? As less than half of the women in the world live in\ndemocracies, analysing female representation outside of the democratic context\nis crucial. We hypothesize that even in non- and partial-democracies, women\nexercise substantive representation. Neutralizing the confounding effects of\ninternational constraints or a general positive approach towards gender\nequality, we create a framework that observes the relationship, proposing and\ntesting several scenarios to identify substantive representation. We observe\ncorrelations over time between the share of women representatives and policies\nfemale representation typically influence: reproductive rights, health spending\nand education spending. Our evidence shows that substantive representation\nappears in non- and partial democracies, and not just in democracies. 
\n
\n A Comparative Analysis of Women\u2019s Political Rights, 1981- 2004: The Role of LegalTraditions<\/a>. 2020. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy<\/i> (with\nVictor Asal) 
\n
In this article, we focus on the legal system to explain\ncross-national and temporal variance in women\u2019s political rights. Compared to\nalternative legal systems, we find that common law is correlated with less\npolitical rights for women. The concepts of political discontinuity and legal\nmemory are central to our theoretical framework. Political discontinuity occurs\nin times of deep political disruptions; for instance, during revolutionary\nperiods. Whereas typically revolutions did not readily yield lasting improvements\nin women\u2019s political rights, individual and systemic forms of legal memory\nmeant that later progress toward political equality was facilitated. It is hard\nto overestimate the influence of legal systems on women\u2019s rights around the\nworld. Using available data for 148 countries from 1981 to 2004, we found that\nlegal systems\u2019 effect is robust to inclusion of more recent periods of\nupheaval, various model specifications and functional forms, disparate\ndatasets, and different outcome variables.
\n
\n Covert or not Covert: National Strategies During Cyber Conflict<\/a>. 2019. In 11th\nInternational Conference on Cyber Conflict: Silent Battle<\/i>. (with Gil Baram) 
\n
Anonymity is considered to be a key characteristic of cyber\nconflict. Indeed, existing accounts in the literature focus on the advantages\nof the non-disclosure of cyber attacks. Such focus inspires the expectation\nthat countries would opt to maintain covertness. This hypothesis is rejected in\nan empirical investigation we conducted on victims\u2019 strategies during cyber\nconflict: in numerous cases, victim states choose to publicly reveal the fact\nthat they had been attacked. These counterintuitive findings are important\nempirically, but even more so theoretically. They motivate an investigation\ninto the decision to forsake covertness. What does actually motivate states to\nmove into the international arena and publicly expose a cyber attack?
\n
\n Prevalent Sentiments of the Concept of Jihad in the Public Comment sphere<\/a>. 2019. Studies\nin Conflict & Terrorism <\/i>(with Gahl Silverman) 
\n
Certain studies of social conflicts and geopolitical\nprocesses through online social networks entail qualitative analysis. One such\nissue is the tension between Western and Muslim societies. We introduce\ncomputer-assisted qualitative sentiment analysis for the inquiry and extraction\nof varied sentiments. The analysis explores the prevalent meanings of the term\njihad through discussions of Muslims and non-Muslims in the online public\nsphere. After examining 4,630 Facebook comments and replies, our examination\nleads to a holistic mapping that details \u201cpeaceful,\u201d \u201cmoderate,\u201d and \u201cradical\u201d\nopinions regarding jihad, which is an integral institution of the Muslim world.\nThrough this method, we suggest a \u201cMuslim\u2013non-Muslim tension indicator,\u201d which\ncan be used in a range of political analyses. 
\n
\n Examining extrajudicial killings: Discriminant analyses of human rights\u2019 violations<\/a>.\n2019. Dynamics\nof Asymmetric Conflict<\/i> (with Victor Asal<\/a>l)
\n
Extrajudicial killings are cases where a government kills\ncitizens with no judicial oversight. We offer first-of-its-kind analyses of\nthis phenomenon that by now is widely discussed in the context of international\npolitics. The theoretical framework proposed here underscores the importance of\ntwo pillars: an independent judiciary and violent conflicts. Ordered logistic\nregression models and GEE time-series cross-sectional analyses with data for\n146 countries from 1981\u20132004 lend support to our theory. Furthermore, the\nanalyses compare extrajudicial killings as a political phenomenon with other\nphenomena they are often associated with or even lumped together with in\nempirical analyses. Those include political imprisonment and political\ndisappearance. We find that in various ways extrajudicial killings are indeed\nunique. 
\n
\n Reproductive Policy Makers: Comparative Analyses of the Influences of International and Domestic Institutions on Reproductive Rights<\/a>.  2018 in Public\nAdministration<\/i> (with Aliza Forman Rabinovici) 
\n
Do policies protecting women\u2019s rights correspond with norm\nchange at the or the level of international institutions? We examine this\nquestion, comparing domestic and international institutional activity in\ncorrelation with reproductive health policy change, specifically, abortion\naccess policy. At the domestic level, we examine female legislators and\npolicies set to encourage gender equality, namely, electoral gender quotas. In\nthe international arena, our theory distinguishes regional from international\ninter-governmental bodies. Original data with measurement innovations\nintroduced here\u2014including the Comparative Abortion Policy Index (CAPI1 and\nCAPI2)\u2014are analyzed for over 150 nations for close to two decades. We find a\nheretofore-overlooked relationship between international entities and\nreproductive health. Gender quotas, however, do not correspond with the general\nassociation state level between female representation and pro-women policy.\nWhen researchers and policymakers consider gender quotas to promote women\u2019s\nrights, they may be advised to encourage female political participation through\nmore organic means. 
\n
\n Explaining the Birthright Citizenship Lottery: Longitudinal and Cross-National Evidencefor Key Determinants<\/a>. 2018. Regulation & Governance<\/i> (with Omer Solodoch<\/a>) 
\n
In the modern nation-state, birthright citizenship laws\u2014jus\nsoli and jus sanguinis\u2014are the two main gateways to sociopolitical membership.\nThe vast majority of the world\u2019s population (97%) obtain their citizenship as a\nmatter of birthright. Yet because comparative research has been focused on\nmeasuring and explaining the multiple components of citizenship and immigration\npolicies, a systematic analysis of birthright citizenship is lacking. We bridge\nthis gap by analyzing the birthright component in prominent databases on\ncitizenship policies and complementing them with original data and measures.\nThis allows us to systematically test institutional and electoral explanations\nfor contemporary and over-time variation in birthright citizenship.\nInstitutional explanations\u2014legal codes and colonial history\u2014are consistently\nassociated with limitations on birthright law. As for electoral explanations,\nnot the traditional left-\/right-wing divide, but rather specific electoral\npowers\u2014Nationalist, Socialist and Social-Democratic parties\u2014are linked with\nreforms in birthright regimes. 
\n
\n An Impediment to Gender Equality?: Religion\u2019s Influence on Development and Reproductive Policy<\/a>. 2018. World Development<\/i> (with Aliza Forman-Rabinovici) 
\n
The effects of religion on development in the area of gender\nequality have been considered substantial in academic work as well as in\npopular and political discourse. A common understanding is that religion\ndepresses women\u2019s rights in general and reproductive and abortion rights in\nparticular. The literature on reproductive rights, however, is\ndisproportionately focused on Western cases, and is limited in its definition\nof religion as a variable. What happens, though, when we switch to a more\ninclusive framework? To what extent do a variety of religious variables\ncorrelate with policy on reproductive rights outside of the Western context? We\nexamine the relevance of the religion-abortion link in a broad comparative\nframework. We introduce the Comparative Abortion Index and test the effects of\na wide range of denominations and religious characteristics on reproductive\nrights. Our study finds that reproductive rights correlate only with some\nreligious denominations, while others have no significance. Additionally, while\nreligiosity correlates with reproductive policy, variables such as religious\nfreedom, separation of religion and state and religious diversity show no\ncorrelative effect. The comparative analyses suggest that the connection\nbetween religion and development in general\u2014and in the area of women\u2019s rights\nin particular\u2014is far more nuanced than previously thought. 
\n
\n Political and Legal Antecedents of Affirmative Action: A Comparative Framework<\/a>.\n2018. Journal of Public Policy<\/i> (with Victor Asal<\/a>) 
\n
Much of the literature on affirmative action is normative.\nFurther, in scholarship that takes an empirical approach to examine this topic,\nthe object of inquiry is typically the ramifications of such provisions; most\nnotably the extent to which they foster social transformation. Yet, we know\nsurprisingly little about the antecedents of affirmative action. This work\nexamines what variables systematically predict affirmative action. We focus on\nthe policy feedback literature and compensatory justice frameworks to examine\nthe effects of democracy, modernization and globalization on affirmative action\nprograms. Time-series cross-sectional analyses of data for hundreds of groups\nfrom all over the globe for the period 1985-2003 confirm our hypotheses. This\nis the first work to examine affirmative action programs in a large-N framework\nof such scale. We find that such programs systematically correlate with\ndemocracy, modernization and globalization. 
\n
\n Women, Demography and Politics: How Lower Fertility Rates Lead to Democracy<\/a>. 2018\nin Demography<\/i> 
\n
Where connections between demography and politics are\nexamined in the literature, it is largely in the context of the effects of male\naspects of demography on phenomena such as political violence. This project\naims to place the study of demographic variables\u2019 influence on politics,\nparticularly on democracy, squarely within the scope of political and social\nsciences\u2014and\u2014to focus on the effects of woman-related demographics, namely\nfertility rates. I test the hypothesis that demographic variables\u2014female-related\npredictors in particular\u2014have an independent effect on political structure.\nComparing different countries over time, when fertility rates decline, we\nobserve a growth in democracy. In the theoretical framework developed, it is\nfamily structure, and the economic and political status of women that account\nfor this change at the macro and micro levels. Findings based on data for over\n140 countries over 3 decades are robust when controlling not only for\nalternative effects, but also for reverse causality and data limitations. 
\n
\n Ideological influences on governance and regulation: The comparative case of supreme courts<\/a>.\n2017. Regulation & Governance<\/i> (with Keren Weinshall<\/a> and Ya\u2019acov Ritov<\/a>) 
\n
A key influence on governance and regulation is the ideology\nof individual decisionmakers. However, certain branches of government \u2013 such as\ncourts \u2013 while wielding wide ranging regulatory powers, are expected to do so\nwith no attitudinal influence. We posit a dynamic response model to investigate\nattitudinal behavior in different national courts. Our ideological scores are\nestimated based on probability models that formalize the assumption that\njudicial decisions consist of ideological, strategic, and jurisprudential\ncomponents. The Dynamic Comparative Attitudinal Measure estimates the\nattitudinal decisionmaking on the institution as a whole. Additionally, we\nestimate Ideological Ideal Point Preference for individual justices. Empirical\nresults with original data for political and religious rights rulings in the\nSupreme Courts of the United States, Canada, India, the Philippines, and Israel\ncorroborate the measures\u2019 validity. Future studies can utilize Ideological\nIdeal Point Preference and the Dynamic Comparative Attitudinal Measure to cover\nadditional courts, legal spheres, and time frames, and to estimate government\ndeference. 
\n
\n International Effects on the Security Wall Rulings of the Israeli High Court<\/a>. 2017. Israel\nStudies Review<\/i> 
\n
With the ever-growing significance of international law both\ndomestically and internationally, courts mediate much of the give and take\nbetween the international system and the national political arenas, thus acting\nin settings where global and local are mixed. Such a pivotal position, I argue,\nlends courts the ability to maximize a twofold utility, which is inextricably\nlinked. First, on the international level, judicial insti- tutions play an\nincreasingly important role and form what is essentially a transnational\nepistemic community. Second, on the domestic level, courts capitalize on this\npivotal position to become increasingly central in the decision-making process,\nforming alliances with other domestic players and thereby securing the\nimplementation of judicial rulings. A case study of decisions of the Israeli\nSupreme Court concerning the security fence Israel built around the Occupied\nTerritories is offered as an empirical test for the Court-Pivot Dual Utility\nModel that I present in this article. 
\n
\n Translating Justice: The International Organization of Constitutional Courts<\/a>.\n2016. Law & Policy<\/i>, 38(2) (with Olga Frishman<\/a>) 
\n
What is the international organization of national\nconstitutional courts? This article develops a theoretical framework to analyze\nthis question and tests it empirically with original data of translated\nopinions. Justices of different nations form an emerging epistemic community,\nwhich is congealed due to common practices as well as to competition and\nselectiveness throughout the judicial career. Opinions translated into English\nas the lingua franca are pivotal for communication within this epistemic community.\nThrough engaging in a transnational judicial dialogue, and particularly as far\nas this dialogue concerns legal citations, this community uses international\nlaw as a key guide to finding equilibrium solutions at national and\ninternational levels. Five sources of international law overwhelmingly\ndominate. In addition, we find evidence in the collegial game within the\ndifferent courts for the existence of a transnational epistemic community of\nSupreme Court justices. 
\n
\n Setting the Agenda of the United States Supreme Court? Organized Interests and theDecision to File and Amicus Curiae Brief at Cert<\/a>. 2015. Justice\nSystem Journal<\/i> 36(2): 119-137 (with Katie Zuber<\/a> and Jonathan Parent<\/a>) 
\n
Past research indicates that amicus briefs influence the\nSupreme Court\u2019s decision to issue a writ of certiorari, however we know\nrelatively little about the reasons that lead interest groups to file such\nbriefs. We seek to explain how organized interests make decisions about whether\nor not to file amicus curiae briefs during case selection, and examine the\nfactors that influence the total number of amicus briefs filed in each case. We\nfind that certain factors influence amicus activity during this early stage of\ndecision-making including the presence of the solicitor general as amicus\ncuriae, case salience, and the issue areas involved in litigation. 
\n
\n Is Certiorari Contingent on Litigant Behavior? Petitioner\u2019s Role in Strategic Auditing<\/a>. 2012. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies<\/i> (with Maxwell Mak<\/a> and Andrew Sidman<\/a>) 
\n
Complementing the burgeoning literature on agenda setting on\nthe Supreme Court of the United States, this paper addresses a key question\nheretofore overlooked \u2013 is the justices\u2019 choice to review a decision\nindependent of the selection of cases for review by the litigants? We argue\nthat the certiorari process cannot be modeled as an independent one.\nRather, it is inextricably linked with and essentially contingent on the\nbehavior of litigants, who bring the case to the Supreme Court. This dependence\nof the Court is important both at the level of theory and at the empirical\nlevel and ignoring it entails bias in the estimation process. Using an original\ndatabase, which includes the universe of religion Free Exercise cases decided\nat the Courts of Appeals from 1968-2006, we find significant selection effects.\nFactors that influence decisions on certiorari are dependent on the\nbehavior of petitioners and should be modeled as such. 
\n
\n Institutional Paths to Policy Change: Judicial Versus Nonjudicial Repeal of Sodomy Laws<\/a>.\n2013. Law and Society Review<\/i> (with Victor Asal<\/a>, Katie Zuber<\/a> and JonathanParent<\/a>) 
\n
What variables lead judicial and non-judicial\ndecision-making bodies to introduce policy change? In the theoretical framework\nproposed, the path dependent nature of law has a differential impact on courts\nand legislatures. Likewise, certain political institutions including elections\nand political accountability lead those bodies to introduce policy change under\ndissimilar circumstances. Global trends, however, affect both institutional\npaths equally. We test this theory with data for the repeal of sodomy laws in\nall countries from 1972-2002. Results from two disparate multivariate models\noverwhelmingly confirm our predictions. The unique institutional position of\ncourts of last resort allows them to be less constrained than legislatures by\neither legal status quo or political accountability. Globalization, on the\nother hand, has a comparable effect on both. This work is path breaking in\noffering a theoretical framework explaining policy change via different\ninstitutional paths, systematically testing the framework comparatively and\nwith respect to a policy issue still on the agenda in many countries. 
\n
\n Original Sin: A Cross-National Study of the Legality of Homosexual Acts<\/a>. 2013. Comparative\nPolitical Studies<\/i> (with Victor Asal<\/a>) 
\n
This paper examines the legality of homosexual acts\nquantitatively in a cross-national perspective with a large sample of countries\nfrom 1972 to 2002. Employing path dependence as its theoretical framework, this\nwork explains how political, economic and legal institutions at the domestic\nand the international levels affect the life of individual citizens. The rights\nand privileges of individuals, the findings of this study indicate, are\ndetermined by a wide array of variables, including legal origin, economic\ndevelopment, religion, democratization and the position of the nation in the\ninternational community. We use recently released cross-national data\nconcerning decriminalization of homosexual intercourse, economic conditions and\npolitical institutions. A generalized estimating equation analyzes\ndecriminalization of homosexual acts. A Cox proportional hazards model examines\nhow long it takes to introduce this legal reform. Lastly, this study also\noffers some important lessons about civil rights and liberties more generally. 
\n
\n Rainbows for Rights: The Role of LGBT Activism in Gay Rights Promotion<\/a>. 2018 in Societies\nwithout Borders<\/i> (with Victor Asal<\/a> and Amanda Murdie<\/a>) 
\n
Scholarship on gay rights has systematically examined\nstructural influences cross-nationally with only anecdotal evidence for the\neffects of advocacy in that realm. Likewise, the literature on political\nactivism has largely focused on the effects of advocacy in the case of physical\nintegrity rights. This project offers theoretical and empirical contributions\nto both of these literatures. In the context of the political consequences of\nactivism, we expand the scope to a new issue area using systematic large-N\nanalyses and we develop theoretical expectations concerning the politics of\nactivism in cases where distinct groups with diametrically opposed goals are\ninvolved in the same campaign. Indeed, we not only find effects for LGBT\nadvocacy on the time until decriminalization of sodomy but we also identify how\nsuch effects are contingent on the resources available to the countermovement.
\n
\n A Cross-National Analysis of the Guarantees of Rights<\/a>. 2013. The\nInternational Political Science Review<\/i> 
\n
What are the predictors of right guarantees at the level of\nindividual countries? We examine this question within the context of what\nfactors lead certain countries, but not others, to have legislation prohibiting\nsexual orientation discrimination in the workplace between 1972-2002. In the\ntheoretical framework, a combination of domestic forces (past inclusion of\nminorities, culture and democratic conditions) and global trends (regulation by\nsupranational bodies and globalization) predict guarantees of rights. To test\nthe theory, GEE time-series cross-sectional analyses are performed on data from\n161 countries. The results, which are robust to changes in model specification\nand alternative measurement schemes, confirm our key hypotheses. We conclude by\ndiscussing the implications of this research for the study of rights generally. 
\n
\n Globalization, Threat and Religious Freedom<\/a>. 2012. Political Studies<\/i> (with Pazit Ben-Nun Bloom<\/a> and Gizem Arikan<\/a>) 
\n
While arguably central to the human experience, religion is\na largely understudied component of social life and of politics. The\ncomparative literature on religion and politics is limited in scope, and offers\nmostly descriptions of trends. We know, for example, that restrictions on\nfreedom of religion are on the rise worldwide. In our theoretical framework,\nthe recently higher universal levels of globalization combine with other\nsources of threat to account for the trend away from religious freedom. As threat\nto the majority religion increases, due to globalization and an increasing\nnumber of minority religions, freedom of religion is on the decline. Data for\ntwo decades from 147 nations are used to test hypotheses. Time-series\ncross-sectional and mediation models estimated at different levels of analysis\nwith data from two independent sources confirm that threat systematically\naccounts for changes in religious freedom, with globalization playing a key\nrole. 
\n
\n Can Faith Limit Immorality? The Politics of Religion and Corruption<\/a>.\n2012. Democratization<\/i> (with Pazit Ben-Nun Bloom<\/a> and Gizem Arikan<\/a>) 
\n
Critically considering scholarship relating religiosity to\nethical behavior, we contend that religion is systematically related to levels\nof corruption, and that the nature of this relationship is contingent on the\npresence of democratic institutions. In democracies, where political\ninstitutions are designed to inhibit corrupt conduct, the morality provided by\nreligion is related to attenuated corruption. Conversely, in systems lacking\ndemocratic institutions, moral behavior is not tantamount to staying away from\ncorrupt ways. Accordingly, in non-democratic contexts, religion would not be\nassociated with decreased corruption. Time-series cross-sectional analyses of\naggregate data for 129 countries for 12 years as well as individual level\nanalyses of data from the World Values Surveys strongly corroborate the\npredictions of our theory. The correlation of religion with reduced corruption\nis conditional on the extent to which political institutions are democratic. 
\n
\n Representative Appointments: The Effect of Women\u2019s Groups in Contentious Supreme Court Confirmations<\/a>. 2013. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy<\/i>, 34:\n1-22 Lead Article 
\n
A large share of decision makers in modern democratic\nsystems are appointed. To what degree do those officials represent con-\nstituents? Representation in this case is determined in part by the extent to\nwhich constituents influence the appointment process. This article examines the\ninfluence of women\u2019s organized inter- ests and constituency preferences on\nSupreme Court confirmation votes. With topics such as sexual harassment,\nprivacy, and Roe v. Wade looming large, gender politics became a salient issue\nduring confirmation battles in the late 1980s and early 1990s and has remained\nso since. Original data from the contentious appoint- ments of Justices David\nSouter, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor are\nanalyzed. Results confirm that women\u2019s organized interests and popular\npreferences have an impact on contentious nominations. Implications for popular\ninflu- ences on appointments and for representation in government writ large\nare discussed. 
\n
\n Judicial Decision Making in Times of Financial Crises: State Supreme Courts and Mortgage Moratorium Laws in the Great Depression.<\/a> 2011. Judicature<\/i> 95(2):\n68-77 (with Quan Li) 
\n
The housing market was a major element in the financial\ncrisis of the 1930s and has been pivotal in the current recession. Government\nreactions to the crises ran the gamut from stimulus plans to far reaching\nlegislative measures. This paper focuses on the behavior of one governmental\nbranch, the judiciary, and its role in the crises. In our theoretical\nframework, statutorily mandated judicial discretion plays a key role in\ninfluencing judicial decisions in times of crisis after controling for the\neffects of ideology, law, institutions, and economic conditions. We test our\nhypotheses with an original database that consists of state Supreme Court\ndecisions on mortgage moratorium laws between 1933 and 1945. The results not\nonly buttress our hypotheses, but also shed new light on how American courts\noperate when assigned a key position in times of economic crises. In conclusion\nand based on our findings, we speculate on the potential role of courts in the\ncurrent crisis. 
\n
\n Setting a Supreme Agenda: Opinion Minded Justices and the Decision on Certiorari<\/a>.\n2011. Rationality and Society<\/i>, 23(4): 452-77 
\n
Justices on the US Supreme Court are rational and therefore\nstrategic policymakers. Yet, how rational are they? How far into the future\nwould their strategic considerations reach? Due to potential influence on both\npolicy and doctrine, ceteris paribus they find opinion authorship\ndesirable; when selecting cases, in addition to thinking about legal issues and\nthe final disposition, justices strategically consider opinion crafting. To\novercome the measurement error inherent to the estimation of rational behavior\nof the type proposed here, the Simulation Extrapolation protocol is introduced.\nThere is strong support for the notion of doctrine-minded justices at cert. The\nsocial implications of such rational behavior are far-reaching; employing this\nstrategy, over the course of her time in office, a justice would be able to\nconsiderably influence several policy and legal issues. In closing,\nimplications of strategic behavior on the individual-justice level for the\nconstitutional position of the Court within American society are discussed.
\n
\n Extreme Dissensus: Why Plurality Opinions Happen on the US Supreme Court<\/a>. Justice\nSystem Journal<\/i> 31(2), 2010 (with Pamela Corley<\/a>, Art Ward<\/a> and Amy Steigerwalt<\/a>) 
\n
Why does the Supreme Court issue plurality decisions? \nPlurality decisions on the Supreme Court represent extreme dissensus where no\nclear majority is formed for any one controlling rationale for the final\ndisposition. Such decisions are important to understand both because they\nresult in the erosion of the Court\u2019s credibility and authority as a source of\nlegal leadership, and because they teach us broader lessons about judicial\ndecision making. In this paper, we provide the first systematic analysis of plurality\ndecisions on the Supreme Court.  We test three possible explanations for\nplurality decisions \u2013 a lack of social consensus, whether the case is legally\n\u201chard,\u201d and an explanation based on the strategic interactions between the\njustices.  We examine all orally argued cases during the 1953-2006 terms\nto test these three competing, yet not mutually exclusive, hypotheses. We find\nthat splintering is more likely when the Court reviews contentious or\npolitically salient questions, in constitutional cases, and when there is\ndissensus on the lower court.  We also find that when the Chief Justice\nassigns the opinion and when the Court is ideologically heterogeneous,\nplurality decisions are less likely. Our findings thus suggest more broadly\nthat the Chief Justice may use his powers of opinion assignment to encourage\nconsensus and guard against potentially delegitimizing defections. They also\nsuggest that ideological polarization need not necessarily result in dissensus.\nHowever, the question going forward is the normative implications for the\nCourt\u2019s decisions when bargaining and accommodation increase and the potential\nreach and import of these same decisions is likely mitigated. 
\n
\n A Strategic Court and National Security: Comparative Lessons from the Israeli Case<\/a>. Israel Studies Forum<\/i> 25(2), 2010 
\n
This paper analyzes decision making in national security\ncases on the Israeli Supreme Court and draws broader comparative conclusions.\nIn the post-9\/11, -7\/7 and -3\/11 era, security has topped the national agendas\nin numerous established democracies, with repercussions involving their courts.\nAnalyses of decision-making on national security in Western judiciaries may\nbenefit from lessons from the Israeli Court, which has been a pivotal player in\nthis domain. A formal model analyzes how internal court institutions plus the\nrationality of individual justices are conducive to strategic Court behavior.\nPredictions are tested empirically using an original database with security\ndecisions from 1997-2004. The findings indicate that constitutional design,\ncourt leadership, ideology of the ruling coalition and interest group activity\nhave influenced decisions of the Israeli Court on national defense. This study\nbuilds on and expands existing scholarship on the complex links between law,\npolitics and national security in Israel and beyond.
\n
\n Beyond Defensive Denials: Evidence from the Blackmun Files for a Broader Scope of Strategic Certiorari.<\/a> Justice System Journal<\/i> 31(3), 2010 
\n
The U.S. Supreme Court has the prerogative to set its own\nagenda. The consequentiality of this decision and the little institutional\nconstraints involved induce justices to select cases strategically. They\nexercise their gate-keeping capacity with future consequences in mind. Based on\noriginal material from the Blackmun Files, this paper examines strategic\nthinking of a broader scope than the type traditionally described in the\nliterature. On top of dispositional outcomes, the strategic behavior analyzed\nconcerns doctrinal output and policy implications. Thus, strategic conduct\nduring certiorari is attached to a broader institutional context that\nincorporates various goals of individual justices, the collegial game, the\nother branches and time. In closing, implications for the constitutional\nposition of the Court are discussed. 
\n
\n Crusades Against Corruption and Institutionally Induced Strategies in the Israeli Supreme Court<\/a> Israel Affairs<\/i> 15(3), 2009 
\n
Scholars of the Israeli judiciary have studied strategic\nbehaviour in this system. Yet, relatively little attention has been given to\nstrategic behaviour at the level of the collegial game in the Israeli Supreme\nCourt. This paper closely examines the institutional platform of this Court,\nand argues that it is conducive to strategic behaviour of individual justices\nin their interactions with their brethren. The effects of strategic thinking on\nthe part of individual Israeli justices are not limited to the collegial game.\nRather, such thinking has had wide reaching ramifications for policymaking in\ndiverse domains such as national security, state and religion and the\nseparation of powers.  \n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n

\n
\n

Peer Reviewed Chapters: <\/h1>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n
\n
\n

\n Covertor not Covert: National Strategies During Cyber Conflict<\/a>. 2019. 11th International\nConference on Cyber Conflict: Silent Battle<\/i>. Min\u00e1rik, S. Alatalu,\nS. Biondi, M. Signoretti, I. Tolga, G. Visky (Eds.) (with Gil Baram) 
\n
Anonymity is considered to be a key characteristic of cyber\nconflict. Indeed, existing accounts in the literature focus on the advantages\nof the non-disclosure of cyber attacks. Such focus inspires the expectation\nthat countries would opt to maintain covertness. This hypothesis is rejected in\nan empirical investigation we conducted on victims\u2019 strategies during cyber\nconflict: in numerous cases, victim states choose to publicly reveal the fact\nthat they had been attacked. These counterintuitive findings are important\nempirically, but even more so theoretically. They motivate an investigation\ninto the decision to forsake covertness. What does actually motivate states to\nmove into the international arena and publicly expose a cyber attack? 
\n
\n Remote Participants: Lessons about Israeli Identity from the Experience of Israeli Parents in America<\/a> in David Tal (editor), Israel Identities:\nBetween East and West<\/i>(Peer -reviewed edited volume) London: Routledge, due:\nOctober 2013 (with Michal Ben Zvi Sommer) 
\n
The research presented here examines the implications of the\nimmigration of Israelis to America in terms of their identity, and what we can\nlearn from their parenting experience about Israeli identity more broadly.\nImmigrant families are becoming an increasingly common element of American\nsociety with important political implications for the United States as well as\nfor their homelands. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, the\nnumber of immigrants living in the United States reached a record high of 37.9\nmillion in 2007, a figure comparable in its proportions to those from the Turn\nof the Twentieth Century. What is more, approximately one in every ten people\nidentifying themselves as Israeli resides in the United States on a permanent\nbasis. Yet, despite the growing significance of this group, scholars have not\nthoroughly explored the challenges immigrant families face and the political\nimplications related. Based on a series of in-depth interviews and workshops\nwith Israelis, who live in the big metropolitan areas in North America, we\nexamine how political and national identities are influenced by immigration. To\nexamine this question, we focus on the parenting experience. We investigate the\nprocesses of identity evolution and formation as those are reflected in the\nexperience of emigrants as parents, and then draw conclusions about Israeli\nidentity more broadly.     \n <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n \n \n \n \n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Research Books The Emerging Republican Minorities: Racial and Ethnic Realignment in the Trump Era (Bloomsbury, 2025) (with Idan Franco) Producing Reproductive Rights: Determining Abortion Policy Worldwide (Cambridge University Press 2019) (with Aliza Forman-Rabinovici) Legal Path Dependence and the Long Arm of the Religious State: Gay Rights and Sodomy Laws in a Comparative Perspective (SUNY Press 2016) (with Victor Asal) … Continue reading “Research”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":8,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-134","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/134","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=134"}],"version-history":[{"count":31,"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/134\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":481,"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/134\/revisions\/481"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/people.socsci.tau.ac.il\/mu\/udisommer\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=134"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}