Measuring case salience in state courts of last resort

Political Research Quarterly

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 559-572

  Vining, Richard L ^a   Wilhelm, Teena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

judicial decision making; media; salience; state courts

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952099543     PISSN: 10659129     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1065912910361222     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Abramowitz Alan I.It's abortion, stupid: Policy voting in the 1992 presidential election.Journal of Politics. 1995;57:176-86.
2. Arrington Theodore S.,Brenner Saul.Strategic voting for damage control on the Supreme Court.Political Research Quarterly. 2004;57:565-73.
3. Arrington Theodore S.,Brenner Saul.Testing Murphy's strategic model: Assigning the majority opinion to the marginal justice in the conference coalition on the U.S. Supreme Court.American Politics Research. 2008;36:416-432.
4. Bailey Michael,Kamoie Brian,Maltzman Forrest.Signals from the tenth justice: The political role of the solicitor general in Supreme Court decision-making.American Journal of Political Science. 2005;49:72-85.
5. Baird Vanessa A.The effect of politically salient decisions on the U.S. Supreme Court's agenda.Journal of Politics. 2004;66:755-72.
6. Booth Alan.The recall of news items.Public Opinion Quarterly. 1970;34:604-10.
7. Brace Paul,Boyea Brent.State public opinion, the death penalty, and the practice of electing judges.American Journal of Political Science. 2008;52:360-72.
8. Brace Paul,Hall Melinda Gann.Neo-institutionalism and dissent in state supreme courts.Journal of Politics. 1990;52:54-70.
9. Brace Paul R.,Hall Melinda Gann.Integrated models of judicial dissent.Journal of Politics. 1993;55:914-35.
10. Brace Paul R.,Hall Melinda Gann.The interplay of preferences, case facts, context, and rules in the politics of judicial choice.Journal of Politics. 1997;59:1206-31.
11. Brace, Paul R., and Melinda Gann Hall. 2005. Is judicial federalism essential to democracy? State courts in the federal system. In Institutions of American democracy: The judicial branch, ed. Kermit L. Hall and Kevin T. McGuire, 174-99. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Brace Paul R.,Hall Melinda Gann,Langer Laura.Placing courts in state politics.State Politics and Policy Quarterly. 2001;1:81-108.
13. Brace Paul R.,Langer Laura,Hall Melinda Gann.Measuring the preferences of state supreme court judges.Journal of Politics. 2000;62:387-413.
14. Brenner, Saul. 1989. Fluidity on the United States Supreme Court: A reexamination. In American court systems, ed. Sheldon Goldman and Austin Sarat. New York: Longman.
15. Brenner Saul.Majority opinion assignment in salient cases on the U.S. Supreme Court: Are new associate justices assigned fewer opinions?.Justice System Journal. 2001;22:209-21.
16. Brenner Saul,Arrington Theodore S.Measuring salience on the Supreme Court: A research note.Jurimetrics. 2002;43:99-113.
17. Cann, Damon, and Teena Wilhelm. 2008. Education finance reform in the American states: A discrete-time competing risks model. Presented at the Midwest Political Science Meeting, Chicago.
18. Canon, Bradley C., and Charles A. Johnson. 1998. Judicial policies: Implementation and impact. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
19. Choi Stephen J.,Gulati G. Mitu.Bias in judicial citations: A window into the behavior of judges?.Journal of Legal Studies. 2008;37:87-130.
20. Collins Paul M.Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court: Investigating the influence of amicus curiae briefs.Political Research Quarterly. 2007;60:55-70.
21. Collins Paul M.Amici curiae and dissensus on the U.S. Supreme Court. 2008. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. 2008a;5:143-70.
22. Collins Paul M.The consistency of judicial choice.Journal of Politics. 2008b;70:861-73.
23. Corbally Sarah F.,Bross Donald C.,Flango Victor E.Filing of amicus curiae briefs in state courts of last resort: 1960-2000.Justice System Journal. 2004;25:39-56.
24. Corley Pamela C.The Supreme Court and opinion content: The influence of parties' briefs.Political Research Quarterly. 2008;61:468-78.
25. Edwards George C.,Mitchell William,Welch Reed.Explaining presidential approval: The significance of issue salience.American Journal of Political Science. 1995;39:108-34.
26. Epstein Lee,Knight JackThe choices justices make. Washington, DC: CQ Press; 1998:.
27. Epstein Lee,Segal Jeffrey A.Measuring issue salience.American Journal of Political Science. 2000;44:66-83.
28. Erbring Lutz,Goldenberg Edie N.,Miller Arthur H.Front-page news and real-world cues: A new look at agenda-setting by the media.American Journal of Political Science. 1980;24:16-49.
29. Fowler James F.,Johnson Timothy R.,Spriggs James F.,Jeon Sangick,Wahlbeck Paul J.Network analysis and the law: Measuring the legal importance of precedents at the U.S. Supreme Court.Political Analysis. 2007;15:324-46.
30. Gibson James L.Challenges to the impartiality of state supreme courts: Legitimacy theory and "new-style" judicial campaigns.American Journal of Political Science. 2008;102:59-75.
31. Giles Micheal W.,Blackstone Bethany,Vining Richard L.The Supreme Court in American democracy: Unraveling the linkages between public opinion and judicial decision making.Journal of Politics. 2008;70:293-306.
32. Giles Robert,Snyder Robert W.Covering the courts: Free press, fair trials, and journalistic performance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers; 1999:.
33. Glick, Henry R., and George W. Pruet Jr. 1986. Dissent in state supreme courts: Patterns and correlates of conflict. In Judicial conflict and consensus: Behavioral studies of American appellate courts, ed. Sheldon Goldman and Charles Lamb. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
34. Graves Scott E.,Teske Paul.State supreme courts and judicial review of regulation.Albany Law Review. 2003;66:857-65.
35. Haines Dennis.Rolling back the top on Chief Justice Burger's opinion assignment desk.University of Pittsburgh Law Review. 1977;38:631-95.
36. Hale F. Dennis.Chief justices' perceptions of news coverage of state supreme courts.Newspaper Research Journal. 1999;20:17-28.
37. Hall Melinda Gann.Constituent influence in state supreme courts: Conceptual notes and a case study.Journal of Politics. 1987;49:1117-24.
38. Hall Melinda Gann.Opinion assignment procedures and conference practices in state supreme courts.Judicature. 1990;73:209-14.
39. Hall, Melinda Gann. 1999. State judicial politics: Rules, structures, and the political game. In American state and local politics, ed. Ronald E. Weber and Paul Brace. New York: Seven Bridges Press.
40. Hall Melinda Gann,Brace Paul.Order in the court: A neo-institutional approach to judicial consensus.Western Political Quarterly. 1989;42:391-407.
41. Hansford Thomas G.Information provision, organizational constraints, and the decision to submit an amicus curiae brief in a U.S. Supreme Court case.Political Research Quarterly. 2004a;57:219-30.
42. Hansford Thomas G.Lobbying strategies, venue selection, and organized interest involvement at the U.S. Supreme Court.American Politics Research. 2004b;32:170-97.
43. Hoekstra Valerie,Johnson Timothy.Delaying justice: The Supreme Court's decision to hear rearguments.Political Research Quarterly. 2003;56:351-60.
44. Langer Laura,Sanchez Gabriel,Wilhelm Teena.To shirk or not to shirk from the chief justice: Associate justices and opinion behavior. Presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Meeting; 2008 Chicago; 2008.
45. Langer Laura,Wilhelm Teena.The ideology of state supreme court chief justices.Judicature. 2005;89:78-86.
46. Lindquist Stefanie A.,Martinek Wendy L.,Hettinger Virginia A.Splitting the difference: Modeling appellate court decisions with mixed outcomes.Law & Society Review. 2007;41:429-55.
47. Maltzman Forrest,Wahlbeck Paul J.May it please the chief? Opinion assignments in the Rehnquist Court.American Journal of Political Science. 1996;40:421-33.
48. Maltzman Forrest,Wahlbeck Paul.Salience or politics: New York Times coverage of the Supreme Court. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association; 2003 Chicago; 2003.
49. Maltzman Forrest,Wahlbeck Paul J.A conditional model of opinion assignment on the Supreme Court.Political Research Quarterly. 2004;57:551-63.
50. Mayhew David R.Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1974:.
51. McAtee Andrea,McGuire Kevin T.Lawyers, justices, and issue salience: When and how do legal arguments affect the U.S. Supreme Court?.Law & Society Review. 2007;41:259-78.
52. Mooney Christopher,Lee Mei-Hsien.The influence of values on consensus and contentious morality policy: U.S. death penalty reform, 1956-1982.Journal of Politics. 2000;62:223-39.
53. Nicholson Chris,Collins Paul M.The solicitor general's amicus curiae strategies in the Supreme Court.American Politics Research. 2008;36:382-415.
54. Peters C. Scott.Getting attention: The effect of legal mobilization on the U.S. Supreme Court's attention to issues.Political Research Quarterly. 2007;60:561-72.
55. Petrocik John R.Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study.American Journal of Political Science. 1996;40:825-50.
56. Rohde David.Policy goals, strategic choice, and majority opinion assignments in the U.S. Supreme Court.American Journal of Political Science. 1972;16:652-82.
57. Segal Jeffrey A.,Spaeth Harold J.The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1993:.
58. Sheehan Reginald S.,Mishler William,Songer Donald R.Ideology, status, and the differential success of direct parties before the Supreme Court.American Political Science Review. 1992;86:464-71.
59. Songer Donald R.,Kuersten Ashlyn.The success of amici in state supreme courts.Political Research Quarterly. 1995;48:31-42.
60. Spriggs James F.,Hansford Thomas G.Explaining the overruling of U.S. Supreme Court precedent.Journal of Politics. 2001;63:1091-1111.
61. Staton Jeffrey K.Constitutional review and the selective promotion of case results.American Journal of Political Science. 2006;50:98-112.
62. Sulkin TracyIssue politics in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2005:.
63. Traut Carol Ann,Emmert Craig F.Expanding the integrated model of judicial decision making: The California justices and capital punishment.Journal of Politics. 1998;60:166-80.
64. Ulmer S. Sidney.The use of power in the Supreme Court: The opinion assignments of Earl Warren, 1953-1960.Journal of Public Law. 1970;19:49-67.
65. Unah Isaac,Hancock Ange-Marie.U.S. Supreme Court decision making, case salience, and the attitudinal model.Law & Policy. 2006;28:295-320.
66. Vining Richard L.,Wilhelm Teena.Explaining high-profile coverage of state supreme court decisions.Social Science Quarterly. 2010;91:703-722.
67. Wahlbeck Paul J.,Spriggs James F.,Maltzman Forrest.Marshalling the Court: Bargaining and accommodation on the United States Supreme Court.American Journal of Political Science. 1998;42:294-315.
68. Way Lori Beth,Turner Charles C.Disagreement on the Rehnquist Court.American Politics Research. 2006;34:293-318.