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 40
Página 2
... policy concerns implicated by the dispute. This adversarial role of amicus briefs in American jurisprudence comports with the fact that the courts serve as battlegrounds for social and economic policy ... preferences into law: In situations ...
... policy concerns implicated by the dispute. This adversarial role of amicus briefs in American jurisprudence comports with the fact that the courts serve as battlegrounds for social and economic policy ... preferences into law: In situations ...
Página 3
... policy preferences presents an interesting conundrum to our understanding of judicial decision making. On the one hand, organized interests' use of the judiciary to further their economic, political, and social agendas acts as a ...
... policy preferences presents an interesting conundrum to our understanding of judicial decision making. On the one hand, organized interests' use of the judiciary to further their economic, political, and social agendas acts as a ...
Página 9
... policy preferences. 13 Specifically, Collins (2004a), Kearney and Merrill (2000), McGuire (1995), and Songer and Sheehan (1993) use a dichotomous dependent variable measuring the success of the petitioning party. McGuire (1990) uses an ...
... policy preferences. 13 Specifically, Collins (2004a), Kearney and Merrill (2000), McGuire (1995), and Songer and Sheehan (1993) use a dichotomous dependent variable measuring the success of the petitioning party. McGuire (1990) uses an ...
Página 10
... policy preferences. Second, I explore the influence of amicus briefs on variability in the justices' voting behavior. Building on interdisciplinary theories of information overload, this allows me to explore how amicus briefs can create ...
... policy preferences. Second, I explore the influence of amicus briefs on variability in the justices' voting behavior. Building on interdisciplinary theories of information overload, this allows me to explore how amicus briefs can create ...
Página 12
... policy preferences. Lacking ambition for higher office, political accountability, and constituting a court of last resort that controls its own jurisdiction, the justices are argued to operate within an institutional setting that frees ...
... policy preferences. Lacking ambition for higher office, political accountability, and constituting a court of last resort that controls its own jurisdiction, the justices are argued to operate within an institutional setting that frees ...
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