-
1
-
-
24944580561
-
New Perspectives for the Comparative Study of the Judiciary: The State Supreme Court Project
-
BRACE, P., and K. S. BUTLER (2001). “ New Perspectives for the Comparative Study of the Judiciary: The State Supreme Court Project,” 22 Justice System Journal 243
-
(2001)
Justice System Journal
, vol.22
, pp. 243
-
-
Brace, P.1
Butler, K.S.2
-
2
-
-
0035527874
-
Haves Versus ‘Have Nots’ in State Supreme Courts: Allocating Docket Space and Wins in Power Asymmetric Cases
-
BRACE, P., and M. G. HALL (2001). “‘Haves’ Versus ‘Have Nots’ in State Supreme Courts: Allocating Docket Space and Wins in Power Asymmetric Cases,” 35 Law and Society Review 393
-
(2001)
Law and Society Review
, vol.35
, pp. 393
-
-
Brace, P.1
Hall, M.G.2
-
3
-
-
10844245124
-
Underdogs, Upperdogs, and the Use of the Amicus Brief: Trends and Explanations
-
BRADLEY, R. C., and P. GARDNER (1985). “Underdogs, Upperdogs, and the Use of the Amicus Brief: Trends and Explanations,” 10 Justice System Journal 78
-
(1985)
Justice System Journal
, vol.10
, pp. 78
-
-
Bradley, R.C.1
Gardner, P.2
-
4
-
-
84934564270
-
Organized Interests and Agenda-Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court
-
CALDEIRA, G. A., and J. R. WRIGHT (1988). “Organized Interests and Agenda-Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court,” 82 American Political Science Review 1109
-
(1988)
American Political Science Review
, vol.82
, pp. 1109
-
-
Caldeira, G.A.1
Wright, J.R.2
-
5
-
-
85010621448
-
What to Say and Where to Say It? Evaluating the Importance of the Institutional Structure on the Content of Amicus Briefs
-
Chicago
-
COMPARATO, S. (2000). “What to Say and Where to Say It? Evaluating the Importance of the Institutional Structure on the Content of Amicus Briefs.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 27-30, Chicago
-
(2000)
Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April
, pp. 27-30
-
-
Comparato, S.1
-
6
-
-
84970306283
-
Exploring the Participation of Organized Interests in Supreme Court Litigation
-
EPSTEIN, L. (1994). “Exploring the Participation of Organized Interests in Supreme Court Litigation,” Political Research Quarterly 335
-
(1994)
Political Research Quarterly
, pp. 335
-
-
Epstein, L.1
-
7
-
-
0001626599
-
Courts and Interest Groups
-
In J. B. Gates and C. A. Johnson (eds.), Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc
-
(1991). “Courts and Interest Groups.” In J. B. Gates and C. A. Johnson (eds.), The American Courts: A Critical Assessment. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc
-
(1991)
The American Courts: A Critical Assessment
-
-
-
8
-
-
0010219754
-
Mapping Out the Strategies Terrain: The Informational Role of Amici Curiae
-
In H. Gillman and C. W. Clayton (eds.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press
-
EPSTEIN, L., and J. KNIGHT (1999). “Mapping Out the Strategies Terrain: The Informational Role of Amici Curiae.” In H. Gillman and C. W. Clayton (eds.), Supreme Court Decision Making: New Institutional Approaches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
-
(1999)
Supreme Court Decision Making: New Institutional Approaches
-
-
Epstein, L.1
Knight, J.2
-
9
-
-
26044476807
-
Lobbying the Supreme Court—An Appraisal of ‘Political Science Folklore
-
HAKMAN, N. (1966). “Lobbying the Supreme Court—An Appraisal of ‘Political Science Folklore,’” 35 Fordham Law Review 15
-
(1966)
Fordham Law Review
, vol.35
, pp. 15
-
-
Hakman, N.1
-
12
-
-
26044434272
-
The Role of the Attorney General as Amicus Curiae
-
In L. A. Huston et al., Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute
-
KRISLOV, S. (1968). “The Role of the Attorney General as Amicus Curiae.” In L. A. Huston et al., The Role of Attorney General of the United States. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute
-
(1968)
The Role of Attorney General of the United States
-
-
Krislov, S.1
-
13
-
-
0009085701
-
The Amicus Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy
-
(1963). “The Amicus Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy,” 72 Yale Law Journal 694
-
(1963)
Yale Law Journal
, vol.72
, pp. 694
-
-
-
14
-
-
0000643890
-
Lawyers, Organized Interests, and the Law of Obscenity: Agenda Setting in the Supreme Court
-
MCGUIRE, K. T., and G. A. CALDEIRA (1993). “Lawyers, Organized Interests, and the Law of Obscenity: Agenda Setting in the Supreme Court,” 89 American Political Science Review 717
-
(1993)
American Political Science Review
, vol.89
, pp. 717
-
-
McGuire, K.T.1
Caldeira, G.A.2
-
15
-
-
85010621467
-
State Supreme Court Litigants and Their Disputes: The Impact of Socioeconomic Development from 1870 to 1970
-
MEEKER, J. W. (1986). State Supreme Court Litigants and Their Disputes: The Impact of Socioeconomic Development from 1870 to 1970. New York: Garland Publishing
-
(1986)
New York: Garland Publishing
-
-
Meeker, J.W.1
-
16
-
-
0010213489
-
Government Litigation in the Supreme Court: The Roles of the Solicitor General
-
NOTE (1969). “Government Litigation in the Supreme Court: The Roles of the Solicitor General,” 83 Yale Law Journal 1442
-
(1969)
Yale Law Journal
, vol.83
, pp. 1442
-
-
-
17
-
-
26044452874
-
Conservative Interest Group Litigation in the Reagan Era and Beyond
-
In M. P. Petracca (ed.), Boulder, CO: Westview Press
-
O’CONNOR, K., and B. S. MCFALL (1992). “Conservative Interest Group Litigation in the Reagan Era and Beyond.” In M. P. Petracca (ed.), The Politics of Interest: Interest Groups Transformed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press
-
(1992)
The Politics of Interest: Interest Groups Transformed
-
-
O’Connor, K.1
McFall, B.S.2
-
18
-
-
0040685569
-
Court Rules and Workload: A Case Study of Rules Governing Amicus Curiae Participation
-
O’CONNOR, K., and L. EPSTEIN (1983). “Court Rules and Workload: A Case Study of Rules Governing Amicus Curiae Participation,” 8 Justice System Journal 35
-
(1983)
Justice System Journal
, vol.8
, pp. 35
-
-
O’Connor, K.1
Epstein, L.2
-
19
-
-
84925928818
-
Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation: An Appraisal of Hakmans ‘Folklore,’”
-
(1981-82). “Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation: An Appraisal of Hakman’s ‘Folklore,’” 16 Law and Society Review 311
-
(1981)
Law and Society Review
, vol.16
, pp. 311
-
-
-
20
-
-
85010624801
-
Federal Courts in the Political Process
-
PELTASON, J. W. (1955). Federal Courts in the Political Process. New York: Random House
-
(1955)
New York: Random House
-
-
Peltason, J.W.1
-
22
-
-
85010558174
-
The American Judicial Process: Models and Approaches. New York: Dodd
-
SHELDON, C. H. (1971). The American Judicial Process: Models and Approaches. New York: Dodd, Mead and Company
-
(1971)
Mead and Company
-
-
Sheldon, C.H.1
-
23
-
-
26044433548
-
Lobbying Through the Courts by State Interest Groups: A Fifty State Comparison
-
Albuquerque, New Mexico
-
THOMAS, C. S., and R. J. HREBENAR (1994). “Lobbying Through the Courts by State Interest Groups: A Fifty State Comparison.” Paper prepared for the Meeting of the Western Political Science Association, March 10-12, Albuquerque, New Mexico
-
(1994)
Paper Prepared for the Meeting of the Western Political Science Association, March
, pp. 10-12
-
-
Thomas, C.S.1
Hrebenar, R.J.2
-
24
-
-
0003429563
-
-
Berkeley: University of California Press
-
VOSE, C. (1959). Caucasians Only. Berkeley: University of California Press
-
(1959)
Caucasians Only
-
-
Vose, C.1
|