Does Chevron matter?

Law and Policy

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 444-469

  Richards, Mark J ^a,b   Smith, Joseph L ^c   Kritzer, Herbert M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748459035     PISSN: 02658240     EISSN: 14679930     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2006.00234.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Barker, Lucius (1967) "Third Parties in Litigation: A Systematic View of the Judicial Function," Journal of Politics 29: 41-69.
2. Baum, Lawrence (1992) "Membership Change and Collective Voting Change in the United States Supreme Court," Journal of Politics 54: 3-24.
3. Breyer, Stephen G., and Richard A. Stewart (1992). Administrative Law and Regulatory Policy: Problems, Text, and Cases. Boston: Little, Brown.
4. Carmines, Edward, and Richard Zeller (1979) Reliability and Validity Assessment. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.
5. Carter, Lief H., and Christine B. Harrington (2000) Administrative Law and Politics: Cases and Comments. 3d ed. New York: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
6. Canon, Bradley C., and Michel Giles (1972) "Recurring Litigants: Federal Agencies Before the Supreme Court," Western Political Quarterly 25: 183-91.
7. Chae, Young-Geun (2000) "The U.S. Supreme Court's Policy Preference and Institutional Restraint in Environmental Law," Wisconsin Environmental Law Journal 7: 41-92.
8. Clayton, Cornell W., and Howard Gillman, eds. (1999) Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
9. Collins, Paul M., Jr. (2004) "Friends of the Court: Examining the Influence of Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation," Law & Society Review 38: 807-32.
10. Cox, D. R., and E. J. Snell (1991) Applied Statistics: Principles and Examples. London: Chapman & Hall.
11. Crowley, Donald W. (1987) "Judicial Review of Administrative Agencies: Does the Type of Agency Matter?" Western Political Quarterly 31: 265-83.
12. Dahl, Robert (1957) "Decisionmaking in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policymaker," Journal of Public Law 6: 279-95.
13. Epstein, Lee, and Jack Knight (1998) The Choices Justices Make. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
14. Epstein, Lee, and Jack Knight (1999) "Mapping Out the Strategic Terrain: The Informational Role of Amici Curiae. " In Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches, edited by C. W. Clayton & H. Gillman. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
15. Epstein, Lee, and Carol Mershon (1996) "Measuring Political Preferences," American Journal of Political Science 40: 261-94.
16. Epstein, Lee, and C. K. Rowland. 1991. "Debunking the Myth of Interest Groups Invincibility in the Courts," American Political Science Review 85: 205-16.
17. Galanter, Marc (1974) "Why the 'Haves' Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change," Law & Society Review 9: 95-160.
18. Garrett, Elizabeth (2003) "Legislating Chevron, " Michigan Law Review 101: 2637-76.
19. Gellhorn, Ernest, and Ronald Levin (1990) Administrative Law in a Nutshell. St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing.
20. George, Tracey, and Lee Epstein (1992) "On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making," American Political Science Review 86: 323-37.
21. Gillman, Howard (1999) "The Court as an Idea, Not a Building (or a Game): Interpretive Institutionalism and the Analysis of Supreme Court Decision-Making." In Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches, edited by C. W. Clayton & H. Gillman. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
22. Handberg, Roger (1979) "The Supreme Court and Administrative Agencies: 1965-1978," Journal of Contemporary Law 6: 161-76.
23. Hanushek, Eric A., and John E. Jackson (1977) Statistical Methods for Social Scientists. New York: Academic Press.
24. Ignagni, Joseph A. (1994) "Supreme Court Decision Making: An Individual-Level Analysis of the Establishment Clause Cases during the Burger and Rehnquist Court Years," American Review of Politics 15: 21-42.
25. Kritzer, Herbert M. (2003) "The Government Gorilla: Why Does Government Come Out Ahead in Appellate Courts?"In Litigation: Do the Have's Still Come Out Ahead?, edited by H. M. Kritzer & S. S. Silbey. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univ. Press.
26. Kritzer, Herbert M., and Mark J. Richards (2003) "Jurisprudential Regimes and Supreme Court Decision Making: The Lemon Regime and Establishment Clause Cases," Law & Society Review 37: 827-40.
27. Kritzer, Herbert M., and Mark J. Richards (2005) "The Influence of Law in the Supreme Court's Search-and-Seizure Jurisprudence," American Politics Research 33: 33-55.
28. Huber, John D., Charles R. Shipan, and Madelaine Pfahler (2001) "Legislatures and Statutory Control of Bureaucracy," American Journal of Political Science 45: 330-45.
29. Maltzman, Forrest, James Spriggs, II, and Paul Wahlbeck (1999) "Strategy and Judicial Choice: New Institutionalist Approaches to Supreme Court Decision-Making" In Supreme Court Decision-Making: New Institutionalist Approaches, edited by C. W. Clayton & H. Gillman. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
30. Martin, Andrew D., and Kevin M. Quinn (2002a) "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953-1999," Political Analysis 10: 134-53.
31. Martin, Andrew D., and Kevin M. Quinn (2002b) "Assessing Preference Change on the U.S. Supreme Court."Unpublished manuscript. Available at http://adm.wustl.edu/change/change.pdf.
32. Merrill, Thomas W., and Kristin E. Hickman (2001) "Chevron's Domain," Georgetown Law Journal 89: 833-921.
33. Pierce, Richard, Jr., Sidney A. Shapiro, and Paul R. Verkuil (1999) Administrative Law and Process. 3d ed. New York: Foundation Press.
34. Richards, Mark J., and Herbert M. Kritzer (2002) "Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making," American Political Science Review 96: 305-21.
35. Scalia, Antonin (1989) "Judicial Deference to Administrative Interpretations of Law" Duke Law Journal 1989: 511-21.
36. Schuck, Peter H., and E. Donald Elliott (1990) "To the Chevron Station: An Empirical Study of Federal Administrative Law," Duke Law Journal 1990: 984-1077.
37. Segal, Jeffrey A. (1984) "Predicting Supreme Court Cases Probabilistically: The Search and Seizure Cases, 1962-1981," American Political Science Review 78: 891-900.
38. Segal, Jeffrey A., and Albert D. Cover (1989) "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices," American Political Science Review 83: 557-66.
39. Segal, Jeffrey A., Lee Epstein, Charles M. Cameron, and Harold J. Spaeth (1995) "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices Revisited," Journal of Politics 57: 812-23.
40. Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold J. Spaeth (1993) The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
41. Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold J. Spaeth (1994) "The Authors Respond," Law and Courts 4: 10-12.
42. Shapiro, Martin (1968) The Supreme Court and Administrative Agencies. New York: Free Press.
43. Sheehan, Reginald (1990) "Administrative Agency and the Court: A Reexamination of the Impact of Agency Type on Decisional Outcomes," Western Political Quarterly 43: 875-85.
44. Sheehan, Reginald (1992) "Federal Agencies and the Supreme Court: An Analysis of Litigation Outcomes, 1953-1988," American Politics Quarterly 20: 478-500.
45. Sheehan, Reginald, and Donald Songer (1992) "Ideology, Status, and the Differential Success of Direct Parties Before the Supreme Court," American Political Science Review 86: 464-71.
46. Smith, Joseph L., and Emerson H. Tiller (2002) "The Strategy of Judging: Evidence from Administrative Law," Journal of Legal Studies 31: 61-82.
47. Spaeth, Harold J. (2002) Documentation, The Original United States Supreme Court Judicial Database, 1953-2001 Terms. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Political Science.
48. Spaeth, Harold J., and Jeffrey A. Segal (1999) Majority Rule or Minority Will: Adherence to Precedence on the U. S. Supreme Court. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
49. Spaeth, Harold J., and Stuart Teger (1982) "Activism and Restraint: A Cloak for the Justices' Policy Preferences." In Supreme Court Activism and Restraint, edited by S. Halpern & C. Lamb. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.
50. Spriggs, James F., and Paul J. Wahlbeck (1997) "Amicus Curiae and the Role of Information at the Supreme Court," Political Research Quarterly 50: 365-86.
51. Starr, Kenneth W., Cass R. Sunstein, Richard K. Willard, Alan B. Morrison, and Ronald M. Levin (1987) " Judicial Review of Administrative Action in a Conservative Era," Administrative Law Review 39: 353-98.
52. Vose, Clement E. (1958) "Litigation as a Form of Pressure Group Activity," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 319: 20-32.