“A Stranger to Its Laws”: Freedom, Civil Rights, and the Legal Ambiguity of <i>Romer V. Evans</i> (1996)

Hasian, Marouf; Parry‐Giles, Trevor

doi:10.1080/00028533.1997.11978025

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Others posit that amicus briefs can provide influential legal arguments not otherwise contained in the parties' legal briefs on the merits. For example, some scholars contend that Justice Kennedy's majority opinion in Romer v. Evans (1996) was substantially influenced by the amicus brief authored by Laurence Tribe and several other prominent law professors (Hasian & Parry-Giles, 1997). Citing Epstein and Walker (1995), Ivers and O'Connor (1987), and McGuire and Palmer (1995), among others, Spriggs and Wahlbeck (1997) state that scholars have made similar arguments regarding the influence of amici in other landmark cases, including Mapp v. Ohio (1961) andWebster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989).…”

Section: Amicus Curiaementioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Effects of Information, Attorney Capability, and Amicus Participation on U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making

Szmer

Ginn

2013

American Politics Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Focusing on litigators or amicus curiae, a significant amount of scholarship has examined the impact of information on Supreme Court decision making. Taking into account that justices have varying degrees of substantive expertise across issues, we model the interaction of justice expertise with these external sources of information. Specifically, we test whether justices are more likely to be influenced by attorney capability in cases where they have less substantive legal expertise. We also explore whether justices’ reliance on amici is conditional on their own expertise, as well as the overall quality of the litigants’ attorneys. As anticipated, this research finds that as the justice’s legal expertise increases, the influence of attorney capability tends to decrease. Moreover, as the expertise of the judge and/or the quality of the attorneys increase, the impact of amici tends to decrease.

show abstract