« The latest SCOTUS nominee short-list news | Main | Prosecutorial power, victims rights, sentencing judgments and judicial empathy »

May 14, 2009

Interesting empirical examination of SCOTUS cert granting

Especially in the criminal justice arena, what the Supreme Court decides to decide is almost as important as what they decide.  Thus, I am always excited to see a new analysis and assessment of how the Justices' pick their cases.  This piece on SSRN, titled " An Empirical Analysis of Supreme Court Certiorari Petition Procedures: The Call for Response and the Call for the Views of the Solicitor General," looks worthy of review by both academics and practitioners.  Here is the abstract:

The Supreme Court frequently uses two tools to gather information about which cases to hear following a petition for writ of certiorari: the call for response and the call for the views of the Solicitor General.  To date, there has been no empirical analysis of how the Supreme Court deploys these tools and little qualitative study. 

This Article fills in basic gaps in the literature by providing concrete answers to common questions regarding these two tools and offers detailed analysis of how and why states, private parties, and the United States (through the Solicitor General) respond to petitions.  In addition, the Article provides much-needed data for litigators and litigants to be able to estimate the probability of their case being heard by the Court, and provides insight on how to react when the Court calls for a response or calls for the views of the Solicitor General.  To reach these conclusions, the Article relies on detailed, quantitative analysis of a novel, 30,000-petition dataset, as well as interviews with top Supreme Court litigators, former Supreme Court clerks, and former staff of the Clerk’s office.

May 14, 2009 at 07:38 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Interesting empirical examination of SCOTUS cert granting:


Being I waste expensive time reading this lawyer masking ideology, does the article mention the Grand Unified Theory of Appellate Decisions, the Rent Seeking Theory? If not, it is lying garbage.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | May 14, 2009 6:11:46 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB