Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme CourtOf the nearly five thousand cases presented to the Supreme Court each year, less than 5 percent are granted review. How the Court sets its agenda, therefore, is perhaps as important as how it decides cases. H. W. Perry, Jr., takes the first hard look at the internal workings of the Supreme Court, illuminating its agenda-setting policies, procedures, and priorities as never before. He conveys a wealth of new information in clear prose and integrates insights he gathered in unprecedented interviews with five justices. For this unique study Perry also interviewed four U.S. solicitors general, several deputy solicitors general, seven judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and sixty-four former Supreme Court law clerks. The clerks and justices spoke frankly with Perry, and his skillful analysis of their responses is the mainspring of this book. His engaging report demystifies the Court, bringing it vividly to life for general readers--as well as political scientists and a wide spectrum of readers throughout the legal profession. Perry not only provides previously unpublished information on how the Court operates but also gives us a new way of thinking about the institution. Among his contributions is a decision-making model that is more convincing and persuasive than the standard model for explaining judicial behavior. |
Contents
1 | |
Jurisdiction and Procedure | 22 |
The Internal Process | 41 |
Special Situations | 92 |
Indices and Signals | 113 |
Bargaining Negotiation and Accommodation | 140 |
Strategy | 198 |
Other editions - View all
Deciding to Decide: Agenda Setting in the United States Supreme Court H. W. Perry No preview available - 2009 |
Common terms and phrases
agenda setting areas argue argument asked attorney bargaining behavior Burger certain justices certworthy chambers Chapter chief justice conference conflict counsel course Court of Appeals Cue Theory decided decision process defensive denials deny discuss list dissents from denial example fact federal court federal question Felix Frankfurter frivolous grant cert important indices and signals informants interchamber interesting interviews involved issue join three judges judgment Judicial jurisdiction jurisprudential Justice Brennan justice's law clerks lawyers litigants look lower court markup mean merits noted obvious opinion outcome particular percolation Perry petition Political Science political scientists pool memo probably problem procedure rarely reasons response role rule rule of four selection Sidney Ulmer simply solicitor someone sometimes statute Stern and Gressman strategic suggested summary disposition talk Tanenhaus things tion U.S. Senate U.S. Supreme Court understand usually vote to grant writ of certiorari write written dissent