Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Informational Need, Institutional Capacity, and Court Receptivity

Interest Groups and Amicus Curiae in State High Courts

Bibliographic Data

ID6340329
AuthorsJenna Becker Kane (West Chester University, PA, USA, corresponding author)
Year2018
Volume71
Issue4
Pages881-894
Publication date2018-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Research Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1065-9129 • E-ISSN: 1938-274X
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1065912918770045
OpenAlexW2800506250
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited35

Interest group participation in state courts of last resort has increased substantially over the past four decades, and the scope of this litigation activity has expanded to include a wider range of group participation. Despite the fact that organized interests increasingly recognize state high courts as legitimate policy venues, little is known about how interest groups choose the specific cases in which they participate. Beginning with the assumption that interest groups seek policy influence, this paper tests the hypothesis that groups strategically target cases that will best serve the policy and institutional interests of the group, while focusing group resources on cases and courts where they are most likely to be successful. Using an original dataset assembled from content analysis of more than 2,300 state supreme court decisions handed down between 1995 and 2010 and spanning three distinct areas of law—products liability, environmental law, and free speech and expression—this paper investigates the case-level and court-level factors that attract interest group participation as amicus curiae in state high courts

Business · Economics · Interest group · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Scope (computer science · State (computer science · Supreme court · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Regulation and Compliance Studies

  • The modern legacy of Mobilizing Interest Groups in America

    Open Access•Kathleen Marchetti•Interest Groups & Advocacy•2021

  • An Update to the Squire State Court of Last Resort Professionalization Index

    Open Access•Peverill Squire, Jordan Butcher•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2021

  • Friends of the Supreme Court

    Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins et al.•Friends of the Supreme Court•2008

  • Caucasians Only

    Clement E Vose•Caucasians Only•1959

  • Mobilizing Interest Groups in America

    Open Access•Jack L Walker, Jack Walker•Mobilizing interest groups in…•1991

  • The Rights Revolution

    Charles R Epp•Rights Revolution•1998

  • Judicial Review in State Supreme Courts

    Laura Langer•Judicial Review in State Supreme…•2002

  • The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court

    Joseph D Kearney, Thomas W Merrill•University of Pennsylvania Law…•2000

  • Why Do Interest Groups Engage the Judiciary? Policy Wishes and Structural Needs

    Open Access•Rorie Spill Solberg, Eric N Waltenburg•Social Science Quarterly•2006

  • Litigation as a Form of Pressure Group Activity

    Open Access•Clement E Vose•The Annals of the American…•1958

  • A Neo-Institutional Explanation of State Supreme Court Responses in Search and Seizure Cases

    Open Access•Scott A Comparato, Scott D Mcclurg•American Politics Research•2007

  • Friends of the Court

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins•Law & Society Review•2004

  • Measuring the Professionalization of U.S. State Courts of Last Resort

    Open Access•Peverill Squire•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2008

  • Competing Constraints

    Open Access•Valerie J Hoekstra, Valerie Hoekstra•Political Research Quarterly•2005

  • Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Perry Mcd Collins, Paul M Collins•Political Research Quarterly•2007

  • Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S. Supreme Court

    Open Access•Gregory A Caldeira, John Wright et al.•American Political Science Review•1988

  • Justice for Sale? Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decisionmaking

    Open Access•Damon Cann•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2007

  • The Rise of Conservative Interest Group Litigation

    Karen O''Connor, Karen O’connor et al.•The Journal of Politics•1983

  • Measuring the Preferences of State Supreme Court Judges

    Paul Brace, Laura Langer et al.•The Journal of Politics•2000

  • Models of State High Court Decision Making in Sex Discrimination Cases

    Gerard S Gryski, Eleanor C Main et al.•The Journal of Politics•1986

  • The Interplay of Preferences, Case Facts, Context, and Rules in the Politics of Judicial Choice

    Paul Brace, Paul R Brace et al.•The Journal of Politics•1997

  • Amici Curiae before the Supreme Court

    Gregory A Caldeira, John Wright et al.•The Journal of Politics•1990

  • Partisan Labels and Democratic Accountability

    Richard P Caldarone, Brandice Canes-Wrone et al.•The Journal of Politics•2009

  • Placing State Supreme Courts in State Politics

    Open Access•Paul Brace, Melinda Gann Hall et al.•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2001

  • Exploring the Participation of Organized Interests in State Court Litigation

    Open Access•Lee Epstein•Political Research Quarterly•1994

  • The Success of Amici in State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Donald R Songer, Ashlyn Kuersten•Political Research Quarterly•1995

  • Interest Group Success in the Courts

    Donald R Songer, Reginald S Sheehan•Political Research Quarterly•1993

  • Amicus Curiae and the Role of Information at the Supreme Court

    James F Spriggs, Paul J Wahlbeck•Political Research Quarterly•1997

  • State Public Opinion, the Death Penalty, and the Practice of Electing Judges

    Open Access•Paul Brace, Brent D Boyea•American Journal of Political…•2008

  • Accountability and Coercion

    Open Access•Gregory A Huber, Sanford C Gordon•American Journal of Political…•2004

  • Case Visibility and the Electoral Connection in State Supreme Courts

    Open Access•Damon M Cann, Damon Cann et al.•American Politics Research•2011

  • Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions

    Open Access•Brandice Canes-Wrone, Tom S Clark et al.•American Political Science Review•2014

  • Quality Over Quantity

    Open Access•J M Box-Steffensmeier, D P Christenson et al.•American Political Science Review•2013

Unique citing works2
Citations per year0,4
Citation span2021 - 2021 (1)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 2

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae