Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision MakingOxford University Press, 2008 M08 15 - 248 páginas The U.S. Supreme Court is a public policy battleground in which organized interests attempt to etch their economic, legal, and political preferences into law through the filing of amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs. In Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making, Paul M. Collins, Jr. explores how organized interests influence the justices' decision making, including how the justices vote and whether they choose to author concurrences and dissents. Collins presents theories of judicial choice derived from disciplines as diverse as law, marketing, political science, and social psychology. This theoretically rich and empirically rigorous treatment of decision-making on the nation's highest court, which represents the most comprehensive examination ever undertaken of the influence of U.S. Supreme Court amicus briefs, provides clear evidence that interest groups play a significant role in shaping the justices' choices. |
Dentro del libro
Resultados 1-5 de 82
Página 2
... justices to rule in the manner advocated in the briefs. Once this audience ... case, at the same time highlighting diverse perspectives on the broader ... deciding narrow legal controversies with little societal importance, courts, and ...
... justices to rule in the manner advocated in the briefs. Once this audience ... case, at the same time highlighting diverse perspectives on the broader ... deciding narrow legal controversies with little societal importance, courts, and ...
Página 3
... decision making. On the one hand, organized interests' use of the judiciary ... justices is clearly an area of essential scholarly importance. The purpose ... justices make (e.g., Pritchett 1948; Rohde and Spaeth 1976; Schubert 1974 ...
... decision making. On the one hand, organized interests' use of the judiciary ... justices is clearly an area of essential scholarly importance. The purpose ... justices make (e.g., Pritchett 1948; Rohde and Spaeth 1976; Schubert 1974 ...
Página 4
Paul M. Collins, Jr. already uncertain decision making. In so doing, I illustrate how organized interests who are unsuccessful at influencing the Court's majority can achieve a partial victory by contributing to a justice's decision to ...
Paul M. Collins, Jr. already uncertain decision making. In so doing, I illustrate how organized interests who are unsuccessful at influencing the Court's majority can achieve a partial victory by contributing to a justice's decision to ...
Página 5
... Justices Breyer, O'Connor, and Douglas, one might suspect that it is the conventional wisdom that amicus curiae briefs influence the decision making of Supreme Court justices. Interestingly, however, this is far from the case. Rather ...
... Justices Breyer, O'Connor, and Douglas, one might suspect that it is the conventional wisdom that amicus curiae briefs influence the decision making of Supreme Court justices. Interestingly, however, this is far from the case. Rather ...
Página 8
... decision making, such as the justices' ideologies (but see Songer and Sheehan 1993). For instance, it may be possible to show that the Warren Court supported the position taken by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Inc. (LDF) in every ...
... decision making, such as the justices' ideologies (but see Songer and Sheehan 1993). For instance, it may be possible to show that the Warren Court supported the position taken by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Inc. (LDF) in every ...
Contenido
1 | |
2 Interest Group Litigation | 17 |
3 Amicus Curiae Participation in the Supreme Court | 37 |
4 Amici Curiae and Judicial Decision Making | 75 |
5 Amici Curiae and the Consistency of Judicial Decision Making | 115 |
6 Amici Curiae and Dissensus on the Supreme Court | 139 |
7 Conclusions and Implications | 165 |
Data and Data Reliability | 187 |
References | 197 |
Table of Cases | 221 |
Index | 225 |
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making Paul M. Collins, Jr. Vista previa limitada - 2008 |
Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making Paul M Collins Sin vista previa disponible - 2008 |
Términos y frases comunes
ACLU advocated Amendment American amici amicus activity amicus briefs filed amicus curiae briefs amicus filings amicus participation analysis argued arguments Association attitudinal model author or join briefs were filed Caldeira and Wright cast a liberal certiorari Collins concurring opinion confidence intervals conservative amicus briefs conservative briefs conservative position consistent example exclusionary rule federal goals heteroskedastic homoskedastic ideological direction indicates influence of amicus interest group involving issue areas join a separate judicial choice judicial decision justice’s decision Kearney and Merrill Krislov legal model legal persuasion liberal amicus briefs liberal briefs liberal conservative liberal justice liberal position liberal vote majority’s marginal effects Metromedia multinomial probit norms number of amicus organized interests perspective policy preferences political probit model respond role salience scholars Segal and Spaeth separate opinion separation of powers Solicitor special concurring statutory interpretation tion U.S. Solicitor U.S. Supreme Court voting behavior write or join