IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v100y2006i01p99-113_06.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Oral Arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court

Author

Listed:
  • JOHNSON, TIMOTHY R.
  • WAHLBECK, PAUL J.
  • SPRIGGS, JAMES F.

Abstract

We posit that Supreme Court oral arguments provide justices with useful information that influences their final votes on the merits. To examine the role of these proceedings, we ask the following questions: (1) what factors influence the quality of arguments presented to the Court; and, more importantly, (2) does the quality of a lawyer's oral argument affect the justices' final votes on the merits? We answer these questions by utilizing a unique data source—evaluations Justice Blackmun made of the quality of oral arguments presented to the justices. Our analysis shows that Justice Blackmun's grading of attorneys is somewhat influenced by conventional indicators of the credibility of attorneys and are not simply the product of Justice Blackmun's ideological leanings. We thus suggest they can plausibly be seen as measuring the quality of oral argument. We further show that the probability of a justice voting for a litigant increases dramatically if that litigant's lawyer presents better oral arguments than the competing counsel. These results therefore indicate that this element of the Court's decisional process affects final votes on the merits, and it has implications for how other elite decision makers evaluate and use information.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Timothy R. & Wahlbeck, Paul J. & Spriggs, James F., 2006. "The Influence of Oral Arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(1), pages 99-113, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:100:y:2006:i:01:p:99-113_06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055406062034/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mintao Nie, 2023. "IOs’ selective adoption of NGO information: Evidence from the Universal Periodic Review," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 27-59, January.
    2. Verhagen, Mark D. & Yam, Julius, 2021. "The law of attraction: How similarity between judges and lawyers helps win cases in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).

    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:cup:apsrev:v:100:y:2006:i:01:p:99-113_06. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.