Organized groups sponsor most constitutional litigation because individual plaintiffs lack incentives.

Evidence

Most constitutional policymaking by the federal courts involves group sponsorship of litigation, as in Brown and Roe. Groups may also pursue their political or ideological aims in cases involving statutory interpretation or the oversight of administrative activity. They may seek to use the courts to build on victories won in the political arena or to reverse the losses they suffered there. The phenomenon of group sponsorship is hardly surprising, given the costs of litigation and the lack of financial incentives for individual plaintiffs. The main exception to group sponsorship involves defendants in criminal cases who claim that their rights were violated, as they have a strong personal stake in the outcome of their cases. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1631

Categorization

• XREF: Links to ch24 highlights on lawyers controlling strategy in political litigation. — connects to: In group litigation lawyers serve the group’s interests, not the individual plaintiff’s — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1176

Broader Connections

• In group litigation lawyers serve the group’s interests, not the individual plaintiff’s #expands (0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1176