Haynie, Stacia L. and Sill, Kaitlyn L. 2007. Experienced Advocates and Litigation Outcomes. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 60, Issue. 3, p. 443.
Southworth, Ann 2017. Elements of the Support Structure for Campaign Finance Litigation in the Roberts Court. Law & Social Inquiry,
Corley, Pamela C. 2008. The Supreme Court and Opinion Content. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 61, Issue. 3, p. 468.
Feldman, Adam 2017. Opinion Construction in the Roberts Court. Law & Policy, Vol. 39, Issue. 2, p. 192.
Szmer, John Johnson, Susan W. and Sarver, Tammy A. 2007. Does the Lawyer Matter? Influencing Outcomes on the Supreme Court of Canada. Law & Society Review, Vol. 41, Issue. 2, p. 279.
BOX-STEFFENSMEIER, JANET M. CHRISTENSON, DINO P. and HITT, MATTHEW P. 2013. Quality Over Quantity: Amici Influence and Judicial Decision Making. American Political Science Review, Vol. 107, Issue. 03, p. 446.
Solowiej, Lisa A. and Collins, Paul M. 2009. Counteractive Lobbying in the U.S. Supreme Court. American Politics Research, Vol. 37, Issue. 4, p. 670.
Schorpp, Susanne Hoffmann, David and Kassow, Benjamin 2017. “Tilted Scales:” The Impact of the U.S. Supreme Court on American Income Inequality. Justice System Journal, p. 1.
Black, Ryan C. and Boyd, Christina L. 2013. Selecting the Select Few: The Discuss List and the U.S. Supreme Court's Agenda-Setting Process. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 94, Issue. 4, p. 1124.
Kromphardt, Christopher D. 2017. Evaluating the Effect of Law Clerk Gender on Voting at the United States Supreme Court. Justice System Journal, Vol. 38, Issue. 2, p. 183.
Szmer, John J. Sarver, Tammy A. and Kaheny, Erin B. 2010. Have We Come a Long Way, Baby? The Influence of Attorney Gender on Supreme Court Decision Making. Politics & Gender, Vol. 6, Issue. 01, p. 1.
Ringsmuth, Eve M. Bryan, Amanda C. and Johnson, Timothy R. 2013. Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 66, Issue. 2, p. 429.
Miller, Banks Keith, Linda Camp and Holmes, Jennifer S. 2015. Leveling the Odds: The Effect of Quality Legal Representation in Cases of Asymmetrical Capability. Law & Society Review, Vol. 49, Issue. 1, p. 209.
Savchak, Elisha Carol and Bowie, Jennifer Barnes 2016. A Bottom-Up Account of State Supreme Court Opinion Writing. Justice System Journal, Vol. 37, Issue. 2, p. 94.
Corley, Pamela C. Collins, Paul M. and Calvin, Bryan 2011. Lower Court Influence on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 73, Issue. 1, p. 31.
Hanretty, Chris 2016. Lawyer rankings either do not matter for litigation outcomes or are redundant. International Journal of the Legal Profession, Vol. 23, Issue. 2, p. 185.
Hansford, Thomas G. and Johnson, Kristen 2014. The Supply of Amicus Curiae Briefs in the Market for Information at the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice System Journal, Vol. 35, Issue. 4, p. 362.
Pryor, Tom 2017. Using Citations to Measure Influence on the Supreme Court. American Politics Research, Vol. 45, Issue. 3, p. 366.
Scherer, Nancy and Miller, Banks 2009. The Federalist Society's Influence on the Federal Judiciary. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 62, Issue. 2, p. 366.
Black, Ryan C. and Owens, Ryan J. 2013. A Built-In Advantage. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 66, Issue. 2, p. 454.
Lupu, Yonatan and Fowler, James H. 2013. Strategic Citations to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court. The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 42, Issue. 1, p. 151.
Harvey, A. and Woodruff, M. J. 2013. Confirmation Bias in the United States Supreme Court Judicial Database. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Vol. 29, Issue. 2, p. 414.
Hawes, Timothy Lin, Jimmy and Resnik, Philip 2009. Elements of a computational model for multi-party discourse: The turn-taking behavior of Supreme Court justices. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60, Issue. 8, p. 1607.
Dumas, Tao L. Haynie, Stacia L. and Daboval, Dorothy 2015. Does Size Matter? The Influence of Law Firm Size on Litigant Success Rates. Justice System Journal, Vol. 36, Issue. 4, p. 341.
Budziak, Jeffrey and Lempert, Daniel 2015. Assessing Threats to Inference with Simultaneous Sensitivity Analysis: The Case of US Supreme Court Oral Arguments. Political Science Research and Methods, p. 1.
Collins, Paul M. and Martinek, Wendy L. 2010. Friends of the Circuits: Interest Group Influence on Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 91, Issue. 2, p. 397.
Smyth, Russell and Mishra, Vinod 2014. Barrister gender and litigant success in the High Court of Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 49, Issue. 1, p. 1.
Hanretty, Chris 2014. Haves and Have-Nots before the Law Lords. Political Studies, Vol. 62, Issue. 3, p. 686.
Bailey, Michael A. 2013. Is Today’s Court the Most Conservative in Sixty Years? Challenges and Opportunities in Measuring Judicial Preferences. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 75, Issue. 3, p. 821.
Dumas, Tao L. and Haynie, Stacia L. 2012. Building an Integrated Model of Trial Court Decision Making. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, Vol. 12, Issue. 2, p. 103.
Wedeking, Justin 2010. Supreme Court Litigants and Strategic Framing. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 54, Issue. 3, p. 617.
McAtee, Andrea and McGuire, Kevin T. 2007. Lawyers, Justices, and Issue Salience: When and How Do Legal Arguments Affect the U.S. Supreme Court?. Law & Society Review, Vol. 41, Issue. 2, p. 259.
ANDERSON IV, ROBERT and TAHK, ALEXANDER M. 2007. Institutions and Equilibrium in the United States Supreme Court. American Political Science Review, Vol. 101, Issue. 04, p. 811.
Krehbiel, Jay N. 2016. The Politics of Judicial Procedures: The Role of Public Oral Hearings in the German Constitutional Court. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 60, Issue. 4, p. 990.
Edelman, Paul H. Klein, David E. and Lindquist, Stefanie A. 2008. Measuring Deviations from Expected Voting Patterns on Collegial Courts. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Vol. 5, Issue. 4, p. 819.
Szmer, John and Ginn, Martha Humphries 2014. Examining the Effects of Information, Attorney Capability, and Amicus Participation on U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making. American Politics Research, Vol. 42, Issue. 3, p. 441.
Black, Ryan C. Treul, Sarah A. Johnson, Timothy R. and Goldman, Jerry 2011. Emotions, Oral Arguments, and Supreme Court Decision Making. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 73, Issue. 2, p. 572.
Hansford, Thomas G. Spriggs, James F. and Stenger, Anthony A. 2013. The Information Dynamics of VerticalStare Decisis. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 75, Issue. 4, p. 894.
Collins, Paul M. 2011. Cognitive Dissonance on the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 64, Issue. 2, p. 362.
Black, Ryan C. Sorenson, Maron W. and Johnson, Timothy R. 2013. Toward an Actor-Based Measure of Supreme Court Case Salience. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 66, Issue. 4, p. 804.
Owens, Ryan J. and Wohlfarth, Patrick C. 2014. State Solicitors General, Appellate Expertise, and State Success Before the U.S. Supreme Court. Law & Society Review, Vol. 48, Issue. 3, p. 657.
Desmarais, Bruce A. 2012. Lessons in disguise: multivariate predictive mistakes in collective choice models. Public Choice, Vol. 151, Issue. 3-4, p. 719.
Kaheny, Erin B. Szmer, John J. and Sarver, Tammy A. 2011. Women Lawyers before the Supreme Court of Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 44, Issue. 01, p. 83.
Collins, Paul M. 2007. Lobbyists before the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 60, Issue. 1, p. 55.
Stephenson, Matthew C 2009. Legal Realism for Economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 23, Issue. 2, p. 191.
Diament, Sean M. Howat, Adam J. and Lacombe, Matthew J. 2017. What is the Canon in American Politics? Analyses of Core Graduate Syllabi. Journal of Political Science Education, p. 1.
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.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.