Elizabeth A Lane
Biographic Data
| ID | 4180174 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Elizabeth A Lane |
| GIVEN NAMES | Elizabeth A |
| FAMILY NAME | Lane |
| SIGNATURE | LANE E A |
| AFFILIATIONS | North Carolina State University |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-1419-1082 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 14 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 38 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 14 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2020 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 4 |
Do Americans Understand the Judicial Philosophies They Endorse? Evidence From Mass and Elite Surveys
Although members of the mass public express support for judicial philosophies--such as originalism--and evaluate nominees and decisions accordingly, it remains unclear whether they apply these philosophies in a coherent and consistent manner. In general, the public rarely employs overarching belief systems when making political judgments. Thus, are individuals philosophically constrained in their thinking about the judiciary? To answer this, we a…
Rules for Thee, Not for Me
Objective The goal of this project is to understand if the practice of judge shopping—strategically filing federal lawsuits to increase the likelihood of a favorable judge—raises concerns about fair judicial procedures. We examine how this practice reflects a broader loyalty‐fairness trade‐off in public evaluations of legal institutions, and the potential venues for this practice. Method We conduct a unique preregistered survey experiment to unde…
Lifetime Appointments, Lasting Reactions
Supreme Court nominations culminate in nearly 24-7, multi-day coverage of the nominee and elected officials discussing the nominee’s views, qualifications, and the Supreme Court. Scholars show that these events shape public attitudes. In this paper, we argue that nominee evaluations, which are largely a function of partisanship, have a significant and enduring effect on public approval of the Court. As a result, we contend that the effect of part…
Beyond the Front Page
Americans rely on the media to learn about the US Supreme Court. Historically, coverage was concentrated among a small set of major newspapers that regularly reported on high-profile decisions. The expansion of digital platforms and the Court’s decision to livestream oral arguments at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic created new opportunities for coverage, but it is unclear whether these changes increased overall media attention on the Court. U…
Cite and Sway? Attorneys, Briefs, and Persuasion at the U.S. Supreme Court
Mixed Signals? Rethinking How Ideology and Institutional Motivations Shape the Solicitor General’s Positions
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) wins more cases before the US Supreme Court than any other party. Recent scholarship shows that justices are most likely to side with the OSG when its position is ideologically aligned with justices’ predispositions and when the OSG takes a position counter its own presumed preferences. However, previous studies fail to account for how the institutional role of the OSG shapes what should be considered a c…
An ecclesiastical court
Recently, scholars have increasingly examined the unique blending of Christian and political ideology known as Christian nationalism. During this period, the US Supreme Court has increasingly ruled in ways that favor Christian nationalism, and Court watchers have criticized several justices for showing bias toward Christianity at best and Christian nationalism at worst. We use two large, nationally representative samples to examine the connection…
You Better Shop Around
Candidate Gender, Campaign Appeals, and Voter Support in Judicial Elections
The Influence of Descriptive Representation on Support for Judicial Nominees and the US Supreme Court
We argue that characteristics of unelected officials directly influence individuals’ perceptions and evaluations of them. These evaluations then have indirect, downstream consequences on evaluations of the institution. To test this, we fielded a unique survey with an oversample of Black Americans after the nomination of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Using a conjoint experimental design to randomize nominee race, we find that…
Gendered Expectations
Are women legislators punished for not supporting women’s substantive policy interests? We test these gendered expectations. We marshal an original content analysis of cable news coverage and two survey experiments testing voters’ assessment of hypothetical legislators on the issues of abortion and equal pay. We find that voters rate both women and men legislators positively for supporting women’s issues and negatively evaluate legislators of bot…
Politicized Battles
Supreme Court vacancies are now characterized by great partisan efforts to confirm—or impede—the nomination. Amid a politicized vacancy before the 2020 election, there was cause to question the conclusion that these vacancies do not harm the judiciary in the public’s eyes. We utilize panel data collected before and after Justice Ginsburg’s death to investigate the effects of the vacancy and partisan posturing to fill it. We find that the battle o…
A Separation-of-Powers Approach to the Supreme Court’s Shrinking Caseload
Since the end of the 1980s the Supreme Court has cut its caseload nearly in half. While this decrease has not gone unnoticed, researchers have largely focused their explanations on institutional factors, such as changes in personnel, creation of the certiorari pool, or an increase in the amount of discretion justices have to set their agenda. Most existing work fails to consider how the preferences of members of Congress and the president also co…
The Purpose of Senatorial Grandstanding during Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
US Supreme Court confirmation hearings provide senators with an opportunity to engage a potential justice on a nationwide stage. Senators probe for information about future behavior on the bench. Nominees work through the questions, oscillating between forthcoming and vague responses. Such behavior encourages popular narratives that characterize this intricate dance as a “vapid and hollow charade.” We challenge this wisdom and argue that senators…
The Influence of Descriptive Representation on Support for Judicial Nominees and the US Supreme Court
We argue that characteristics of unelected officials directly influence individuals’ perceptions and evaluations of them. These evaluations then have indirect, downstream consequences on evaluations of the institution. To test this, we fielded a unique survey with an oversample of Black Americans after the nomination of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Using a conjoint experimental design to randomize nominee race, we find that…
Politicized Battles
Supreme Court vacancies are now characterized by great partisan efforts to confirm—or impede—the nomination. Amid a politicized vacancy before the 2020 election, there was cause to question the conclusion that these vacancies do not harm the judiciary in the public’s eyes. We utilize panel data collected before and after Justice Ginsburg’s death to investigate the effects of the vacancy and partisan posturing to fill it. We find that the battle o…
The Purpose of Senatorial Grandstanding during Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
US Supreme Court confirmation hearings provide senators with an opportunity to engage a potential justice on a nationwide stage. Senators probe for information about future behavior on the bench. Nominees work through the questions, oscillating between forthcoming and vague responses. Such behavior encourages popular narratives that characterize this intricate dance as a “vapid and hollow charade.” We challenge this wisdom and argue that senators…
You Better Shop Around
Candidate Gender, Campaign Appeals, and Voter Support in Judicial Elections
A Separation-of-Powers Approach to the Supreme Court’s Shrinking Caseload
Since the end of the 1980s the Supreme Court has cut its caseload nearly in half. While this decrease has not gone unnoticed, researchers have largely focused their explanations on institutional factors, such as changes in personnel, creation of the certiorari pool, or an increase in the amount of discretion justices have to set their agenda. Most existing work fails to consider how the preferences of members of Congress and the president also co…
Gendered Expectations
Are women legislators punished for not supporting women’s substantive policy interests? We test these gendered expectations. We marshal an original content analysis of cable news coverage and two survey experiments testing voters’ assessment of hypothetical legislators on the issues of abortion and equal pay. We find that voters rate both women and men legislators positively for supporting women’s issues and negatively evaluate legislators of bot…
The Purpose of Senatorial Grandstanding during Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings
US Supreme Court confirmation hearings provide senators with an opportunity to engage a potential justice on a nationwide stage. Senators probe for information about future behavior on the bench. Nominees work through the questions, oscillating between forthcoming and vague responses. Such behavior encourages popular narratives that characterize this intricate dance as a “vapid and hollow charade.” We challenge this wisdom and argue that senators…
A Separation-of-Powers Approach to the Supreme Court’s Shrinking Caseload
Since the end of the 1980s the Supreme Court has cut its caseload nearly in half. While this decrease has not gone unnoticed, researchers have largely focused their explanations on institutional factors, such as changes in personnel, creation of the certiorari pool, or an increase in the amount of discretion justices have to set their agenda. Most existing work fails to consider how the preferences of members of Congress and the president also co…
Politicized Battles
Supreme Court vacancies are now characterized by great partisan efforts to confirm—or impede—the nomination. Amid a politicized vacancy before the 2020 election, there was cause to question the conclusion that these vacancies do not harm the judiciary in the public’s eyes. We utilize panel data collected before and after Justice Ginsburg’s death to investigate the effects of the vacancy and partisan posturing to fill it. We find that the battle o…
Cite and Sway? Attorneys, Briefs, and Persuasion at the U.S. Supreme Court
Mixed Signals? Rethinking How Ideology and Institutional Motivations Shape the Solicitor General’s Positions
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) wins more cases before the US Supreme Court than any other party. Recent scholarship shows that justices are most likely to side with the OSG when its position is ideologically aligned with justices’ predispositions and when the OSG takes a position counter its own presumed preferences. However, previous studies fail to account for how the institutional role of the OSG shapes what should be considered a c…
An ecclesiastical court
Recently, scholars have increasingly examined the unique blending of Christian and political ideology known as Christian nationalism. During this period, the US Supreme Court has increasingly ruled in ways that favor Christian nationalism, and Court watchers have criticized several justices for showing bias toward Christianity at best and Christian nationalism at worst. We use two large, nationally representative samples to examine the connection…
You Better Shop Around
Candidate Gender, Campaign Appeals, and Voter Support in Judicial Elections
The Influence of Descriptive Representation on Support for Judicial Nominees and the US Supreme Court
We argue that characteristics of unelected officials directly influence individuals’ perceptions and evaluations of them. These evaluations then have indirect, downstream consequences on evaluations of the institution. To test this, we fielded a unique survey with an oversample of Black Americans after the nomination of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Using a conjoint experimental design to randomize nominee race, we find that…
Gendered Expectations
Are women legislators punished for not supporting women’s substantive policy interests? We test these gendered expectations. We marshal an original content analysis of cable news coverage and two survey experiments testing voters’ assessment of hypothetical legislators on the issues of abortion and equal pay. We find that voters rate both women and men legislators positively for supporting women’s issues and negatively evaluate legislators of bot…
Do Americans Understand the Judicial Philosophies They Endorse? Evidence From Mass and Elite Surveys
Although members of the mass public express support for judicial philosophies--such as originalism--and evaluate nominees and decisions accordingly, it remains unclear whether they apply these philosophies in a coherent and consistent manner. In general, the public rarely employs overarching belief systems when making political judgments. Thus, are individuals philosophically constrained in their thinking about the judiciary? To answer this, we a…
Rules for Thee, Not for Me
Objective The goal of this project is to understand if the practice of judge shopping—strategically filing federal lawsuits to increase the likelihood of a favorable judge—raises concerns about fair judicial procedures. We examine how this practice reflects a broader loyalty‐fairness trade‐off in public evaluations of legal institutions, and the potential venues for this practice. Method We conduct a unique preregistered survey experiment to unde…
Lifetime Appointments, Lasting Reactions
Supreme Court nominations culminate in nearly 24-7, multi-day coverage of the nominee and elected officials discussing the nominee’s views, qualifications, and the Supreme Court. Scholars show that these events shape public attitudes. In this paper, we argue that nominee evaluations, which are largely a function of partisanship, have a significant and enduring effect on public approval of the Court. As a result, we contend that the effect of part…
Beyond the Front Page
Americans rely on the media to learn about the US Supreme Court. Historically, coverage was concentrated among a small set of major newspapers that regularly reported on high-profile decisions. The expansion of digital platforms and the Court’s decision to livestream oral arguments at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic created new opportunities for coverage, but it is unclear whether these changes increased overall media attention on the Court. U…
Judicial and Constitutional Studies (13 works) · Political science (9 works) · Supreme court (9 works) · Law (8 works) · Politics (7 works) · Law (6 works) · Legal and Constitutional Studies (5 works) · Electoral Systems and Political Participation (4 works) · Gender Politics and Representation (3 works) · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems (3 works)