{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00663716814159292, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.073825503355705, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The impact of the Australian High Court on elite opinion

Institutional theory suggests that policy views of a Court in democratic regimes are never far out of line for long with the policy views of the dominant lawmaking majorities because of relatively regular turnover in the membership of the Court. The result is the Court may provide legitimacy to majoritarian policies and can sometimes influence elite preferences. The authors develop and test a theory of legitimation using a data set administered to all candidates running for a seat in both houses of the Australian National Parliament. Using methods originally developed in public opinion research, they explore whether political elites respond to decisions made by the High Court in the area of governmental regulation of work environments. Their findings indicate that the High Court was able to effect a structural change in elite opinion.