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 71
Página xii
... amici curiae on the Supreme Court, it has many antecedents. Portions of it previously appeared as “Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court: Investigating the Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs” in Political Research Quarterly (Volume 60 ...
... amici curiae on the Supreme Court, it has many antecedents. Portions of it previously appeared as “Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court: Investigating the Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs” in Political Research Quarterly (Volume 60 ...
Página 6
Paul M. Collins, Jr. Although the first amicus curiae appeared before the Supreme Court ... amicus participation in the Court is now the norm, not the exception ... number of issue areas5 or cases,6 and analyze group influence. 4 See, e.g. ...
Paul M. Collins, Jr. Although the first amicus curiae appeared before the Supreme Court ... amicus participation in the Court is now the norm, not the exception ... number of issue areas5 or cases,6 and analyze group influence. 4 See, e.g. ...
Página 7
... amicus briefs play an important role in environmental litigation, it is unclear whether this group influence is ... number of times the litigant with amicus support prevailed divided by the total number of times that litigant ...
... amicus briefs play an important role in environmental litigation, it is unclear whether this group influence is ... number of times the litigant with amicus support prevailed divided by the total number of times that litigant ...
Página 8
... amicus briefs on the Court fail to control for more established influences on judicial decision making, such as the ... number of briefs are filed for both sides, when it has one less amicus brief filed than its opponent, and so on. 10 ...
... amicus briefs on the Court fail to control for more established influences on judicial decision making, such as the ... number of briefs are filed for both sides, when it has one less amicus brief filed than its opponent, and so on. 10 ...
Página 9
... amicus briefs come from the controlled analyses of Collins (2004a), Kearney and Merrill (2000), McGuire (1990, 1995) ... number of justices voting in favor of the libertarian position in obscenity cases. For an exception to focusing on ...
... amicus briefs come from the controlled analyses of Collins (2004a), Kearney and Merrill (2000), McGuire (1990, 1995) ... number of justices voting in favor of the libertarian position in obscenity cases. For an exception to focusing on ...
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