Friends with benefits: Case significance, amicus curiae, and agenda setting on the U.S. Supreme Court

Jessica A. Schoenherr and Ryan C. Black

International Review of Law and Economics, 2019, vol. 58, issue C, 43-53

Abstract: The Supreme Court enjoys nearly complete discretion when it makes its initial agenda-setting decisions. In 1988, Greg Caldeira and John Wright published an important study that showed amicus curiae briefs signal the underlying significance of a case and increase the likelihood that the Supreme Court will grant review. We reassess this relationship using additional data and enhanced measures. Our results confirm the importance of case significance in the Court's agenda-setting decision making.

Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014481881830245X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:58:y:2019:i:c:p:43-53

DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2018.12.009

Access Statistics for this article

International Review of Law and Economics is currently edited by C. Ott, A. W. Katz and H-B. Schäfer

More articles in International Review of Law and Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().