The Court chooses cases to set national legal principles rather than correct lower-court errors.
Evidence
In choosing the cases it will hear, the Court exercises almost total discretion. Because virtually all cases coming to the Court have already been tried and have received appellate review, the justices are less concerned with correcting lower court errors than with establishing legal principles or resolving disputes that have national implications. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 299
Categorization
- DEFINE: Clarifies the discretionary certiorari model of Supreme Court review as policy-setting rather than error-correcting.
- XREF: connects to: The Court accepts nationally important political disputes but avoids unresolvable ones — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 913; Automatic appellate rights make appeals courts primarily error-correcting bodies. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 288; A ruling’s reach depends on how broadly a court frames its legal principle — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3181 (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- Justices may grant review to correct lower court rulings they oppose.
#complicates(0.82) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1530 - A ruling’s reach depends on how broadly a court frames its legal principle
#expands(0.78) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3181 - Elevating a single case holding to a principle causes improper legal breadth.
#qualifies(0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 136