IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v91y2010i2p397-414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Friends of the Circuits: Interest Group Influence on Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals

Author

Listed:
  • Paul M. Collins
  • Wendy L. Martinek

Abstract

Objective. Though there is an extensive literature focused on the participation and efficacy of interest group amici curiae in the U.S. Supreme Court, there is little rigorous analysis of amici curiae in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Here, we systematically analyze the influence of amicus curiae briefs on U.S. Court of Appeals decision making to provide insights regarding both judicial decision making and the efficacy of interest groups. Methods. We use a probit model to capture influences on appellant success in the courts of appeals from 1997–2002. Results. We find that amicus briefs filed in support of the appellant enhance the likelihood of that litigant's probability of success, but that amicus briefs filed in support of the appellee have no effect on litigation outcomes. Conclusion. Amici can help level the playing field between appellants and appellees by serving to counter the propensity to affirm in the U.S. Courts of Appeals.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul M. Collins & Wendy L. Martinek, 2010. "Friends of the Circuits: Interest Group Influence on Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(2), pages 397-414, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:91:y:2010:i:2:p:397-414
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00699.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00699.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00699.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hall, Richard L. & Deardorff, Alan V., 2006. "Lobbying as Legislative Subsidy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(1), pages 69-84, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Cotton, Christopher, 2012. "Pay-to-play politics: Informational lobbying and contribution limits when money buys access," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 369-386.
    3. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2018. "Rational ignorance, populism, and reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 119-135.
    4. Thanh Le & Erkan Yalcin, 2023. "Endogenous expropriation and political competition," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 313-332, March.
    5. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    6. Hadani, Michael & Doh, Jonathan P. & Schneider, Marguerite, 2019. "Social movements and corporate political activity: Managerial responses to socially oriented shareholder activism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 156-170.
    7. Frederik Stevens & Iskander De Bruycker, 2020. "Influence, affluence and media salience: Economic resources and lobbying influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(4), pages 728-750, December.
    8. Jeheung Ryu & Randall W. Stone, 2018. "Plaintiffs by proxy: A firm-level approach to WTO dispute resolution," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 273-308, June.
    9. John M. de Figueiredo & Brian Kelleher Richter, 2013. "Advancing the Empirical Research on Lobbying," NBER Working Papers 19698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Le, Thanh & Yalcin, Erkan, 2018. "Lobbying, campaign contributions, and electoral competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 559-572.
    11. Timothy Werner, 2015. "Gaining Access by Doing Good: The Effect of Sociopolitical Reputation on Firm Participation in Public Policy Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1989-2011, August.
    12. Aydın Balyer & Erkan Tabancalı, 2019. "The Roles of Interest and Pressure Groups in Developing Sustainable Educational Policies in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Marie Daumal, 2021. "The economic and political causes of the U.S. 2008 financial crisis [Les causes économiques et politiques de la crise financière de 2008]," Working Papers hal-03261070, HAL.
    14. Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun & Bert Fraussen, 2023. "Explaining why public officials perceive interest groups as influential: on the role of policy capacities and policy insiderness," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 191-209, June.
    15. Wolfe, Robert, 2007. "Harvesting Public Policy? Private Influence on Agricultural Trade Policy in Canada," Working Papers 7339, Canadian Agricultural Trade Policy Research Network.
    16. Sojin Jang & Hongtao Yi, 2022. "Organized elite power and clean energy: A study of negative policy experimentations with renewable portfolio standards," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 8-31, January.
    17. Adam Fremeth & Brian Kelleher Richter & Brandon Schaufele, 2018. "Spillovers from regulating corporate campaign contributions," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 244-265, December.
    18. Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Bayesian Explanations for Persuasion," OSF Preprints ygw8e, Center for Open Science.
    19. Jan Beyers & Marcel Hanegraaff, 2017. "Balancing friends and foes: Explaining advocacy styles at global diplomatic conferences," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 461-484, September.
    20. Arndt Wonka & Sebastian Haunss, 2020. "Cooperation in networks: Political parties and interest groups in EU policy-making in Germany," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 130-151, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:91:y:2010:i:2:p:397-414. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.