Journal ArticleDOI
Supreme Court Justices as Strategic Decision Makers: Aggressive Grants and Defensive Denials on the Vinson Court
TLDR
The authors examine the extent to which justices consider the relative likelihood of winning on the merits when deciding to grant or deny review, and find strong evidence that justices who wish to affirm carefully consider probable outcomes, but find no evidence that they reverse do so.Abstract:
We examine strategic certiorari voting among the justices of the Vinson Court, ie, the extent to which justices consider the relative likelihood of winning on the merits when deciding to grant or deny review We find strong evidence that justices who wish to affirm carefully consider probable outcomes, but find no evidence that justices who wish to reverse do so In Perry's (1991) terms, we find that the justices engage in aggressive grants but do not engage in defensive denialsread more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging
TL;DR: This paper found that women are significantly more likely to rule in favor of the rights litigant when a woman serves on the panel and that men are significantly less likely to vote for a woman on a panel when the judge is a man.
Journal ArticleDOI
Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging
TL;DR: In this article, the role of sex in judging has been explored by addressing two questions of long-standing interest to political scientists: whether and in what ways male and female judges decide cases distinctly and whether serving with a female judge causes malestobehavedifferently.
Journal ArticleDOI
Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts
TL;DR: The hallmark of the new positive theories of the judiciary is that Supreme Court justices will frequently defer to the preferences of Congress when making decisions, particularly in statutory cases in which it is purportedly easy for Congress to reverse the Court as mentioned in this paper.
Journal ArticleDOI
Sophisticated voting and gate-keeping in the supreme court
TL;DR: The U.S. Supreme Court is one institution where sophisticated voting should be common, but, paradoxically, where scholarly consensus about its existence has yet to emerge as mentioned in this paper, and sophisticated voting has raised serious questions about its empirical importance in real-world institutions.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy
John Ferejohn,Charles R. Shipan +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate congressional influence on bureaucracy in a constitutional system in which powers are separated and shared among several branches of government, and explore some implications of judicial review and presidential veto power in a simple model of policy formation.
Journal ArticleDOI
Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyze amicus curiae briefs filed before the decision on certiorari and assess their impact on the Court's selection of a plenary docket.
Journal Article
Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court
TL;DR: Jurisdiction and procedure the internal process special situations indices and signals bargaining, negotiation and accommodation strategy certworthiness a decision model as discussed by the authors, and an extended discussion of jurisdiction is presented.