Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T22:58:25.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulating Supreme Court Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2015

Richard L. Pacelle Jr.
Richard L. Pacelle Jr.*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Students of the judiciary have long been concerned with the factors that contribute to decision-making at the individual and institutional levels. In particular, analysts have focused a great deal of attention on the Supreme Court and the behavior of its members. Despite this attention, analysts have differed as to the relative influence of the factors justices rely upon when making their decisions. Even the courses taught in a standard political science undergraduate curriculum send mixed signals about these factors to students. Basic constitutional law courses tend to overestimate the role of doctrinal interpretation and precedent and underestimate the impact of the values and attitudes of the Court's members. Courses on the judicial process and politics err in the opposite direction.

When the decision-making literature is viewed as a whole, five basic determinants of judicial decisions emerge: the background of the justice (Tate 1981), the justice's attitudes and values (Rohde and Spaeth 1976), the dynamics inherent in small-groups (Murphy 1964; Woodward and Armstrong 1979), the member's conception of the role of the Court (Howard 1977), and the impact of external stimuli (Casper and Posner 1974). Some of these variables can be measured, but some are very difficult to gauge. As a consequence, analysts cannot accurately assess the relative impact of these five factors upon the individual's decision.

Information

Type
For the Classroom
Information
The Political Science Teacher , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , Spring 1989, pp. 8 - 10
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bibliography

The following sources are all part of the syllabus used in the simulation seminar. Each student is expected to read a common body of general research about the litigation and Court processes and those sources that fall within their specific roles.

I. OVERVIEW OF COURT PROCEDURES

Baum, Lawrence. 1985. The Supreme Court, 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Goldman, Sheldon and Jahnige, Thomas P.. 1985. The Federal Courts as a Political System, 3d ed. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
O'Brien, David. 1986. Storm Center. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar

II. CASE SELECTION

Provine, Doris Marie. 1980. Case Selection in the United States Supreme Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1978. Selecting Cases for Supreme Court Review: An Underdog Model. American Political Science Review, 72: 902–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1972. The Decision to Grant Certiorari as an Indicator to Decision “On the Merits.” Polity, 4: 9–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulmer, S. Sidney. 1984. The Supreme Court's Certiorari Decisional Conflict Predictive Variable. American Political Science Review, 78: 901–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

III. JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING

A. Background of Justices

Tate, C. Neal. 1981. Personal Attribute Models of the Voting Behavior of the U.S. Supreme Court Justices: Liberalism in Civil Liberties and Economic Decisions. American Political Science Review, 75: 355–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohde, David W. and Spaeth, Harold J.. 1976. Supreme Court Decision-Making. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Murphy, Walter F. 1964. Elements of Judicial Strategy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Howard, J. Woodford. 1968. On the Fluidity of Judicial Choice. American Political Science Review, 62: 43–57.Google Scholar
Rohde, David. 1972. Policy Goals, Strategic Choices, and Majority Opinion Assignment in the United States Supreme Court. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 16: 652–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slotnick, Elliot. 1979. Who Speaks for the Court? Majority Opinion Assignment from Taft to Burger. American Journal of Political Science, 23: 60–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steamer, Robert J. 1986. Chief Justice: Leadership and the Supreme Court. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, Bob and Armstrong, Scott. 1979. The Brethren. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar
Howard, J. Woodford. 1977. Role Perceptions and Behavior on Three U.S. Courts of Appeals. Journal of Politics, 39: 916–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casper, Gerhard and Posner, Richard. 1976. The Workload of the Supreme Court. Chicago: American Bar Federation.Google Scholar

IV. INDIVIDUAL JUDICIAL BEHAVIOR

Abraham, Henry J. 1985. Justices and Presidents: A Political History of Appointments to the Supreme Court. 2d ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Leon. 1978. The Justices of the Supreme Court, Vol. 5. Edgemont: Chelsea House Publishing.Google Scholar
Witt, Elder. 1986. A Different Justice. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar

V. ROLE OF LITIGANTS

Galanter, Marc. 1974. Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change. Law & Society Review, 9: 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krislov, Samuel. 1963. The Amicus Curiae Brief: From Friendship to Advocacy. Yale Law Journal, 72: 694–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, Karen and Epstein, Lee. 1980–1981. Amicus Curiae Participation in U.S. Supreme Court Litigation. Law & Society Review, 16: 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlozman, Kay Lehman and Tierney, John. 1986. Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar

VI. INDIVIDUAL LITIGANTS

Baker, Liva. 1985. Miranda: Crime, Law, and Politics. New York: Atheneum Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Joseph G. 1985. Constitutional Rights of the Accused. 2d ed. Rochester: Lawyer's Cooperative Publishers.Google Scholar
Donohue, William. 1985. The Politics of the American Civil Liberties Union. New Brunswick: Transaction Press.Google Scholar
Elazar, Daniel. 1984. American Federalism: A View from the States. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee. 1985. Conservatives in Court. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
Finch, Minnie. 1981. The NAACP: Its Fight for Justice. Metuchen: Scarecrow Press.Google Scholar
O'Connor, Karen. 1980. Women's Organizations’ Use of the Courts. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Puro, Stephen. 1981. The United States as Amicus Curiae. In Courts, Law, and Judicial Process, ed. Ulmer, S. Sidney. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Scigliano, Robert. 1971. The Supreme Court and the Presidency. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Wasby, Stephen. 1983. Interest Groups in Court: Race Relations Litigation. Interest Group Politics, eds. Cigler, Allan and Loomis, Burdett. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar

VII. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Nowak, John, Rotunda, Ronald, and Young, J. Nelson. 1986. Constitutional Law. 3d ed. Minneapolis: West Publishing.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1984. Constitutional Civil Liberties. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1984. Constitutional Law of the Federal System. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar