Justices vote strategically on certiorari to advance constitutional policy goals
Evidence
Other scholars have concluded that the justices’ votes on certiorari reflect strategic considerations. Their votes to hear cases or to deny certiorari are designed to advance their views on constitutional policy. Two considerations are involved: the justices’ perception of whether the lower court decided the case correctly and their perception of how the Supreme Court is likely to rule B o x 5. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 918
Categorization
- DEFINE: Introduces the strategic model of Supreme Court agenda-setting as an alternative to the cue theory.
- XREF: connects to: Judicial ethics and independence prevent justices from trading votes or applying pressure — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1563; First Amendment jurisprudence has been used to advance a conservative-libertarian judicial agenda — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 350; Judicial independence lets appointed justices shed partisanship and change their views — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 539
Broader Connections
- Judicial ethics and independence prevent justices from trading votes or applying pressure
#complicates(0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1563 - Judicial independence lets appointed justices shed partisanship and change their views
#complicates(0.73) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 539 - First Amendment jurisprudence has been used to advance a conservative-libertarian judicial agenda
#exemplifies(0.72) — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 350