Interest group participation, competition, and conflict in the U.S. Supreme court

Law and Social Inquiry

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 955-984

  Collins Jr , Paul M ^a   Solowiej, Lisa A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS   (United States)

^b BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35548963418     PISSN: 08976546     EISSN: 17474469     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-4469.2007.00084.x     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Basinger, Nancy Winemiller. 2004. The Legal Strategy Choices of Charities in Their Court-Based Advocacy Efforts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 15-18.
2. Behuniak-Long, Susan. 1991. Friendly Fire: Amici Curiae and Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. Judicature 74 : 261 70.
3. Bentley, Arthur F. 1908. The Process of Government. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
4. Berry, Jeffrey M. 1997. The Interest Group Society, 3rd ed. New York : Longman.
5. Bradley, Robert C. Paul Gardner. 1985. Underdogs, Upperdogs, and the Use of the Amicus Curiae Brief. Justice System Journal 19 : 78 96.
6. Browne, William P. 1990. Organized Interests and Their Issue Niches: A Search for Pluralism in a Policy Domain. Journal of Politics. 52 : 477 509.
7. Caldeira, Gregory A., Marie Hojnacki John R. Wright. 2000. The Lobbying Activities of Organized Interests in Federal Judicial Nominations. Journal of Politics 62 : 51 69.
8. Caldeira, Gregory A. John R. Wright. 1988. Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court. American Political Science Review 82 : 1109 27.
9. Caldeira, Gregory A. John R. Wright. 1990. Amici Curiae Before the Supreme Court: Who Participates, When, and How Much. Journal of Politics 52 : 782 806.
10. 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.
11. Collins, Paul M., Jr. 2007. Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court: Investigating the Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs. Political Research Quarterly 60 : 55 70.
12. Comparato, Scott A. 2003. Amici Curiae and Strategic Behavior in State Supreme Courts. Westport, CT : Praeger.
13. Cortner, Richard C. 1968. Strategies and Tactics of Litigants in Constitutional Cases. Journal of Public Law 17 : 287 307.
14. Dahl, Robert A. 1961. Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven, CT : Yale University Press.
15. Day, Jack G. 2001. Words that Counted - A Vignette. Case Western Reserve Law Review 52 : 373 74.
16. Ennis, Bruce L. 1984. Effective Amicus Briefs. Catholic University Law Review 33 : 603 09.
17. Epstein, Lee. 1985. Conservatives in Court. Knoxville : The University of Tennessee Press.
18. Epstein, Lee. 1991. Courts and Interest Groups. In The American Courts : A Critical Assessment, ed. John B. Gates Charles A. Johnson. Washington, DC : Congressional Quarterly Press.
19. Epstein, Lee. 1994. Exploring the Participation of Organized Interests in State Court Litigation. Political Research Quarterly 47 : 335 51.
20. Epstein, Lee Gary King. 2002. The Rules of Inference. University of Chicago Law Review 69 : 1 133.
21. Gibson, James L. 1997. United States Supreme Court Judicial Data Base, Phase II: 1953-1993. Ann Arbor, MI : Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
22. Hettinger, Virginia A., Stefanie A. Lindquist Wendy L. Martinek. 2006. Judging on a Collegial Court: Influences on Federal Appellate Decision Making. Charlottesville : University of Virginia Press.
23. 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. Law & Policy 9 : 161 78.
24. Jost, Kenneth. 1996. The Supreme Court Yearbook, 1995-1996. Washington, DC : Congressional Quarterly Press.
25. Kearney, Joseph D. Thomas W. Merrill. 2000. The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 148 : 743 855.
26. Kearney, Richard C. Reginald S. Sheehan. 1992. Supreme Court Decision Making: The Impact of Court Composition on State and Local Government Litigation. Journal of Politics 54 : 1008 25.
27. King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane Sidney Verba. 1996. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
28. Kolbert, Kathryn. 1989. The Webster Amicus Curiae Briefs: Perspectives on the Abortion Controversy and the Role of the Supreme Court. American Journal of Law & Medicine 15 : 153 69.
29. Krislov, Samuel. 1963. The Amicus Curiae Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy. Yale Law Journal 72 : 694 721.
30. Kuersten, A.K. Jason Jagemann. 2000. Does the Interest Group Choir Really "Sing with an Upper Class Accent?" Coalitions of Race and Gender Groups Before the Supreme Court. Women & Politics 21 : 53 73.
31. Lowman, Michael K. 1992. The Litigating Amicus Curiae: When Does the Party Begin After the Friends Leave? American University Law Review 41 : 1243 99.
32. Lynch, Kelly J. 2004. Best Friends?: Supreme Court Law Clerks on Effective Amicus Curiae Briefs. Journal of Law & Politics 20 : 33 75.
33. McGuire, Kevin T. 1990. Obscenity, Libertarian Values and Decision Making in the Supreme Court. American Politics Quarterly 18 : 47 67.
34. McGuire, Kevin T. 1995. Repeat Players in the Supreme Court: The Role of Experienced Lawyers in Litigation Success. Journal of Politics 57 : 187 96.
35. Morris, Thomas R. 1987. States Before the U.S. Supreme Court: State Attorneys General as Amicus Curiae. Judicature 70 : 298 305.
36. O'Connor, Karen. 1983. The Amicus Curiae Role of the U.S. Solicitor General in Supreme Court Litigation. Judicature 66 : 256 64.
37. O'Connor, Karen Lee Epstein. 1982. The Importance of Interest Group Involvement in Employment Discrimination Litigation. Howard Law Journal 25 : 709 29.
38. O'Connor, Karen Lee Epstein. 1983a. Court Rules and Workload: A Case Study of Rules Governing Amicus Curiae Participation. Justice System Journal 8 : 35 45.
39. O'Connor, Karen Lee Epstein. 1983b. The Rise of Conservative Interest Group Litigation. Journal of Politics 45 : 479 89.
40. O'Connor, Karen Lee Epstein. 1989. Public Interest Law Groups. Westport, CT : Greenwood Press.
41. Parker, Frederick R. 1999. Washington v. Glucksberg and Vacco v. Quill: An Analysis of the Amicus Curiae Briefs and the Supreme Court's Majority and Concurring Opinions. Saint Louis University Law Journal 43 : 469 542.
42. Perry, H. W., Jr. 1991. Deciding to Decide : Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
43. Puro, Steven. 1971. The Role of Amicus Curiae in the United States Supreme Court: 1920-1966. PhD diss., Department of Political Science, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
44. Rustad, Michael Thomas Koenig. 1993. The Supreme Court and Junk Social Science: Selective Distortion in Amicus Briefs. North Carolina Law Review 72 : 91 162.
45. Salisbury, Robert H. 1984. Interest Representation: The Dominance of Institutions. American Political Science Review 78 : 64 76.
46. Salisbury, Robert H., John P. Heinz, Edward O. Laumann Robert L. Nelson. 1987. Who Works With Whom? Interest Group Alliance and Opposition. American Political Science Review 81 : 1217 34.
47. Samuels, Suzanne U. 2004. First Among Friends : Interest Groups, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Right to Privacy. Westport, CT : Praeger.
48. Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. New York : Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
49. Scheppele, Kim Lane Jack L. Walker, Jr. 1991. The Litigation Strategies of Interest Groups. In Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements, ed. Jack L. Walker, Jr. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press.
50. Schlozman, Kay L. 1984. What Accent the Heavenly Chorus? Political Equality and the American Pressure System. Journal of Politics 46 : 1006 32.
51. Schlozman, Kay L. John T. Tierney. 1986. Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York : Harper and Row.
52. Segal, Jeffrey A. 1988. Amicus Curiae Briefs by the Solicitor General During the Warren and Burger Courts. Western Political Quarterly 41 : 135 44.
53. Songer, Donald R. Reginald S. Sheehan. 1993. Interest Group Success in the Courts: Amicus Participation in the Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly 46 : 339 54.
54. Spaeth, Harold J. 2004. The Original United States Supreme Court Database, 1953-2004 Terms. East Lansing : Department of Political Science, Michigan State University.
55. Spriggs, James F. Paul J. Wahlbeck. 1997. Amicus Curiae and the Role of Information at the Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly 50 : 365 86.
56. Sungaila, Mary-Christine. 1999. Effective Amicus Practice Before the United States Supreme Court: A Case Study. Southern California Review of Law and Women's Studies 8 : 187 96.
57. Truman, David B. 1951. The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion. New York : Knopf.
58. Vose, Clement. 1955. NAACP Strategy in the Covenant Cases. Western Reserve Law Review 6 : 101 45.
59. Walker, Jack L., JR. 1991. Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press.
60. Walter, Bettyruth. 1988. The Jury Summation As Speech Genre: An Ethnographic Study of What it Means to Those Who Use It. Amsterdam : J. Benjamins Publishing Co.
61. Wasby, Stephen L. 1995. Race Relations Litigation in an Age of Complexity. Charlottesville : University Press of Virginia.
62. Wohl, Alexander. 1996. Friends with Agendas: Amicus Curiae Briefs May Be More Popular Than Persuasive. American Bar Association Journal 82 : 46 50.
63. Wright, John R. 1989. PAC Contributions, Lobbying, and Representation. Journal of Politics 51 : 713 29.