The adversary system makes litigants the Court’s primary information source.
Evidence
To decide a case, the Supreme Court needs information about the facts, the applicable law, and the likely consequences of its decision. Under our adversary system, the justices look to the litigants in the case for much of this information. The attorneys for each party file legal briefs and then argue the case orally before the justices. Other groups interested in the outcome of the case may, with the Court’s permission, also submit legal briefs called amicus curiae—literally “friend of the court”—briefs. Finally, the justices can rely on the record of proceedings and the opinions of the lower courts. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1535
Categorization
- DEFINE: Defines amicus curiae (‘friend of the court’) briefs and locates them within the adversary model of judicial information gathering.
- XREF: connects to: Litigants’ sense of control over complex cases is often an illusion. — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action , 1183; The adversary system works by having opposing sides produce and challenge evidence — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 802; Inquisitorial systems give judges rather than lawyers the dominant courtroom role — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law: An Introduction, 343 (+17 more)
Broader Connections
- The adversary system works by having opposing sides produce and challenge evidence
#corroborates(1.00) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 802 - Inquisitorial systems give judges rather than lawyers the dominant courtroom role
#contradicts(1.00) — Lawrence M. Friedman and Grant M. Hayden, American Law, 343 - Courts depend on litigants to learn whether their rulings are obeyed
#corroborates(1.00) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2875 - Litigated cases self-select to those where both sides have plausible legal arguments
#corroborates(1.00) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 253 - The Supreme Court’s signals shape which cases litigants choose to bring
#complicates(0.90) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 902 - Ad hoc adjudication breaks litigant participation and undermines its legitimacy
#contradicts(0.90) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3312 - A judicial precedent attaches specific legal consequences to detailed case facts.
#complicates(0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 131 - Litigants shift forums and legal grounds to follow whichever courts are most receptive.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3376 - Litigants strategically select forums where procedural rules favor their cases
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 268 - Justice systems can perpetuate faked-evidence verdicts through institutional willful blindness
#complicates(0.80) - Legal systems require public belief that verdicts reflect actual truth.
#complicates(0.80) — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action, 1303 - The Court can reverse its own precedent by reinterpreting the facts it governs.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2541 - Courts-appointed private counsel systematically underprepared criminal defenses.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 723 - Automatic appellate rights make appeals courts primarily error-correcting bodies.
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 288 - Litigants divide into occasional one-shotters and frequent repeat players who learn the system
#complicates(0.80) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2258