Friends of the court: Examining the influence of amicus curiae participation in U.S. Supreme Court litigation

Law and Society Review

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 807-832

  Collins Jr , Paul M ^a  

^a BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 10844230141     PISSN: 00239216     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0023-9216.2004.00067.x     Document Type: Review

References (81)

1. Behuniak-Long, Susan (1991) "Friendly Fire: Amici Curiae and Webster v. Reproductive Health Services," 74 Judicature 261-70.
2. Beveridge, Albert J. (1947) The Life of John Marshall. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
3. Bickel, Alexander M. (1986) The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
4. Bradley, Robert C., & Paul Gardner (1985) "Underdogs, Upperdogs and the Use of the Amicus Brief: Trends and Explanations," 10 The Justice System J. 78-96.
5. Breyer, Stephen (1998) "The Interdependence of Science and Law," 82 Judicature 24-7.
6. Caldeira, Gregory A., & John R. Wright (1988) "Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court," 82 American Political Science Rev. 1109-27.
7. Casper, Jonathan D. (1976) "The Supreme Court and National Policymaking," 70 American Political Science Rev. 50-66.
8. Covey, Frank M. Jr. (1953) "Amicus Curiae: Friend of the Court," 9 DePaul Law Rev. 30-7.
9. Dahl, Robert (1957) "Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policymaker," 6 J. of Public Law 279-95.
10. Day, Jack G. (2001) "Words that Counted A Vignette," 52 Case Western Reserve Law Rev. 373-4.
11. Deen, Rebecca E., Joseph Ignagni, & James Meernik (2003) "The Solicitor General as Amicus, 1953-2000: How Influential?," 87 Judicature 60-71.
12. Douglas, William O. (1962) "Transcript of Conversations between Justice William O. Douglas and Professor Walter F. Murphy," Cassette Number 9: May 23, 1962. On file with the Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library, Princeton University.
13. Ennis, Bruce L. (1984) "Effective Amiens Briefs," 33 Catholic University Law Rev. 603-9.
14. Epstein, Lee (1985) Conservatives in Court. Knoxville: The Univ. of Tennessee Press.
15. _ (1991) "Courts and Interest Groups," in J. Gates & C. Johnson, eds., The American Courts: A Critical Assessment. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
16. Epstein, Lee, & Jack Knight (1998) The Choices Justices Make. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
17. _ (1999) "Mapping Out the Strategic Terrain: The Informational Role of Amici Curiae," in C. Clayton & H. Gillman, eds., Supreme Court Decision Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press.
18. Epstein, Lee, & C. K. Rowland (1991) "Debunking the Myth of Interest Group Invincibility in the Courts," 85 American Political Science Rev. 205-17.
19. Epstein, Lee, Jeffrey A. Segal, Harold J. Spaeth, & Thomas G. Walker (1994) The Supreme Court Compendium: Data, Decisions, and Developments, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
20. Flaherty, Francis J. (1983) "Amicus: A Friend or Foe?," National Law J. 14 Nov., 1.
21. Flemming, Roy B., & B. Dan Wood (1997) "The Public and the Supreme Court: Individual Justice Responsiveness to American Policy Moods, " 41 American J. of Political Science 468-98.
22. Funston, Richard (1975) "The Supreme Court and Critical Elections," 69 American Political Science Rev. 795-811.
23. Galanter, Marc (1974) "Why the 'Haves' Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change," 9 Law & Society Rev. 95-160.
24. Gibson, James L. (1997) United States Supreme Court Judicial Database, Phase II: 1953-1993. Houston, TX: Univ. of Houston [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: InterUniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
25. Giles, Michael W., & Christopher Zorn (2000) "Gibson Versus Case-Based Approaches: Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part," 10 Law & Courts 10-16.
26. Greene, William H. (2000) Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27. Hagle, Timothy M., & Harold J. Spaeth (1993) "Ideological Patterns in the Justices' Voting in the Burger Court's Business Cases," 55 J. of Politics 495-505.
28. Hansford, Thomas G. (2004) "Information Provision, Organizational Constraints, and the Decision to Submit an Amicus Curiae Brief in a U.S. Supreme Court Case," 57 Political Research Q. 219-30.
29. Hojnacki, Marie (1997) "Interest Groups' Decisions to Join Alliances or Work Alone," 41 American J. of Political Science 61-87.
30. Ivers, Gregg, & Karen O'Connor (1987) "Friends as Foes: The Amicus Curiae Participation and Effectiveness of the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans for Effective Law Enforcement in Criminal Cases, 1969-1982," 9 Law & Policy 161-78.
31. Kearney, Joseph D., & Thomas W. Merrill (2000) "The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court," 148 University of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 743-855.
32. King, David C., & Jack L. Walker (1992) "The Provision of Benefits by Interest Groups in the United States," 54 J. of Politics 394-426.
33. Kolbert, Kathryn (1989) "The Webster Amicus Curiae Briefs: Perspectives on the Abortion Controversy and the Role of the Supreme Court," 15 American J., of Law and Medicine, 153-68.
34. Koshner, Andrew Jay (1998) Solving the Puzzle of Interest Group Litigation. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
35. Krislov, Samuel (1963) "The Amicus Curiae Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy," 72 Yale Law J. 694-721.
36. Maltzman, Forrest, James F. Spriggs, & Paul J. Wahlbeck (2000) Crafting Law on the Supreme Court. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
37. Marshall, Thomas (1989) Public Opinion and the Supreme Court. New York: Longman.
38. McGuire, Kevin T. (1990) "Obscenity, Libertarian Values and Decision Making in the Supreme Court," 18 American Politics Q. 47-67.
39. _ (1995) "Repeat Players in the Supreme Court: The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success," 57 J. of Politics 187-96.
40. _ (1998) "Explaining Executive Success in the U.S. Supreme Court," 51 Political Research Q. 505-26.
41. _ (2002) Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court: Cases and Controversies. New York: McGraw-Hill.
42. McGuire, Kevin T., & Barbara Palmer (1995) "Issue Fluidity on the U.S. Supreme Court," 89 American Political Science Rev. 691-702.
43. Mishler, William, & Reginald S. Sheehan (1993) "The Supreme Court as a Countermajoritarian Institution? The Impact of Public Opinion on Supreme Court Decisions," 87 American Political Science Rev. 87-101.
44. _ (1991) "Popular Influence on Supreme Court Decisions: A Response," 88 American Political Science Rev. 716-24.
45. Moe, Terry M. (1980) The Organization of Interests: Incentives and the Internal Dynamics of Political Interest Groups. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
46. Munford, Luther T. (1999) "When Does the Curiae Need an Amicus?," I The J. of Appellate Practice & Process 279-84.
47. Murphy, Walter E. (1964) Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
48. Norpoth, Helmut, & Jeffrey A. Segal (1994) "Popular Influence on Supreme Court Decisions," 88 American Political Science Rev. 711-16.
49. O'Connor, Karen (1980) Women's Organizations' Use of the Courts, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
50. O'Connor, Karen, & Lee Epstein (1982) "Amicus Participation in the U.S. Supreme Court: An Appraisal of Hackman's Folklore," 16 Law & Society Rev. 311-20.
51. _ (1983) "Court Rules and Workload: A Case Study of Rules Governing Amicus Curiae Participation," 8 The Justice System J. 35-45.
52. Olson, Mancur Jr. (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
53. Perry, H. W. Jr. (1991) Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
54. Puro, Steven (1971) "The Role of 'Amicus Curiae in the United States Supreme Court: 1920-1960," Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo
55. _ (1981) "The United States as Amicus Curiae," in S. Ulmer, ed., Courts, Law and Judicial Processes. New York: Free Press.
56. Rustad, Michael, & Thomas Koenig (1993) "The Supreme Court and Junk Social Science: Selective Distortion in Amicus Briefs," 72 North Carolina Law Rev. 91-162.
57. Salokar, Rebecca Mae (1992) The Solicitor General: The Politics of Law. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press.
58. Schubert, Glendon (1959) Quantitative Analysis of Judicial Behavior. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
59. Scigliano, Robert (1971) The Supreme Court and the Presidency. New York: Free Press.
60. Segal, Jeffrey A. (1988) "Amicus Curiae Briefs by the Solicitor General During the Warren and Burger Courts," 41 Western Political Q. 135-11.
61. Segal, Jeffrey A., & Albert Cover (1989) "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices," 83 American Political Science Rev. 557-65.
62. Segal, Jeffrey A., Lee Epstein, Charles M. Cameron, & Harold J. Spaeth (1995) "Ideological Values and the Votes of Justices Revisited," 57 J. of Politics 812-23.
63. Segal, Jeffrey A., & Harold J. Spaeth (1993) The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
64. Sheehan, Reginald S., William Mishler, & Donald R. Songer (1992) "Ideology, Status and the Differential Success of Direct Parties Before the Supreme Court," 86 American Political Science Rev. 464-71.
65. Songer, Donald R., & Ashlyn Kuersten (1995) "The Success of Amici in State Supreme Courts," 48 Political Research Q. 31-42.
66. Songer, Donald R., Ashlyn Kuersten, & Erin Kaheny (2000) "Why the Haves Don't Always Come Out Ahead: Repeat Players Meet Amici Curiae For the Disadvantaged," 53 Political Research Q. 537-56.
67. Songer, Donald R., & Reginald S. Sheehan (1993) "Interest Group Success in the Courts: Amicus Participation in the Supreme Court," 46 Political Research Q. 339-54.
68. Spaeth, Harold J. (1999) United States Supreme Court Judicial Database, 1953-1997 Terms, 9th ICPSR version. East Lansing: Michigan State Univ., Department of Political Science [producer]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
69. Spriggs, James F., & Paul J. Wahlbeck (1997) "Amicus Curiae and the Role of Information at the Supreme Court," 50 Political Research Q. 365-86.
70. Statacorp (1999) User's Guide: Release 6.0. College Station. Texas: Stata Press.
71. Stern, Robert L., Eugene Gressman, Stephen M. Shapiro, & Kenneth S. Geller (2002) Supreme Court Practice: For Practice in the Supreme Court of the United States, 8th ed. Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs.
72. Stimson, James A. (1985) "Regression in Time and Space: A Statistical Essay," 29 American J. of Political Science 914-47.
73. Stimson, James A., Michael B. MacKuen, & Robert S. Erickson (1995) "Dynamic Representation," 89 American Political Science Rev. 543-65.
74. Stumpf, Harry, P. (1998) American Judicial Politics, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
75. Sungaila, Mary-Christine (1999) "Effective Amicus Practice Before the United States Supreme Court: A Case Study," 8 Southern California Rev. of Law & Women's Studies 187-95.
76. Vose, Clement E. (1955) "NAACP Strategies in the Covenant Cases," 6 Western Law Rev. 101-45.
77. _ (1967) Caucasians Only: The Supreme Court, the NAACP, and the Restrictive Covenant Cases. Berkeley: The Univ. of California Press.
78. Walker, Thomas G., & Lee Epstein (1993) The Supreme Court of the United States: An Introduction. New York: St. Martin's Press.
79. Wasby, Stephen L. (1995) Race Relations Litigation in an Age of Complexity. Charlottesville: Univ. Press of Virginia.
80. Wheeler, Stanton, Bliss Cartwright, Robert Kagan, & Lawrence Friedman (1987) "Do the Haves' Come Out Ahead? Winning and Losing in State Supreme Courts, 1870-1970," 21 Law & Society Rev. 403-45.
81. Yates, Jeff (2002) Popular Justice: Presidential Prestige and Executive Success in the Supreme Court. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press.