Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T12:29:07.671Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How the Supreme Court Alters Opinion Language to Evade Congressional Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2022

Ryan J. Owens ,
Justin Wedeking  and
Patrick C. Wohlfarth
Ryan J. Owens
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Justin Wedeking
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Patrick C. Wohlfarth
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that actors can attempt to shield their policy choices from unfavorable review by crafting them in a manner that will increase the costs necessary for supervisory institutions to review them. We apply this theory to the US Supreme Court and demonstrate how justices strategically obfuscate the language of majority opinions in the attempt to circumvent unfavorable review from a politically hostile Congress. The results suggest that Supreme Court justices can and do alter the language of their opinions to raise the costs of legislative review and thereby protect their decisions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Law and Courts , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , Spring 2013 , pp. 35 - 59
Copyright
© 2013 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Black, Ryan C., Madonna, Anthony J.. Owens, Ryan J.. and Lynch, Michael S.. 2007. “Adding Recess Appointments to the President’s ‘Tool Chest’ of Unilateral Powers.” Political Research Quarterly 60 (4): 645–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Ryan C., and Owens, Ryan J.. 2009. “Agenda-Setting in the Supreme Court: The Collision of Policy and Jurisprudence.” Journal of Politics 71 (3): 1062–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Ryan C. 2012. The Solicitor General and the United States Supreme Court: Executive Influence and Judicial Decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bligh, Michelle C., Kohles, Jeffrey C.. and Meindl, James R.. 2004. “Charting the Language of Leadership: A Methodological Investigation of President Bush and the Crisis of 9/11.” Journal of Applied Psychology 89 (3): 562–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonneau, Chris W., Hammond, Thomas H.. Forrest Maltzman, and Wahlbeck, Paul J.. 2007. “Agenda Control, the Median Justice, and the Majority Opinion on the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (4): 890–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Charles M. 2000. Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrubba, Clifford, Barry Friedman, Martin, Andrew D.. and Georg Vanberg. 2012. “Who Controls the Content of Supreme Court Opinions?” American Journal of Political Science 56 (2): 400–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casillas, Christopher J., Enns, Peter K.. and Wohlfarth, Patrick C.. 2011. “How Public Opinion Constrains the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 55 (1): 74–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Tom S. 2009. “The Separation of Powers, Court-Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy.” American Journal of Political Science 53 (4): 971–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Tom S., and Benjamin Lauderdale. 2010. “Locating Supreme Court Opinions in Doctrine Space.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (4): 871–90.Google Scholar
Coleman, Brady. 2001. “Lord Denning and Justice Cardozo: The Judge as Poet-Philosopher.” Rutgers Law Journal 32 (Winter): 485–518.Google Scholar
Coleman, Brady, and Quy Phung. 2010. “The Language of Supreme Court Briefs: A Large-Scale Quantitative Investigation.” Journal of Appellate Practice and Process 11 (1): 75–103.Google Scholar
Collins, Paul M., Jr. 2008. Friends of the Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Converse, Jean M. 1976. “Predicting No Opinions in the Polls.” Public Opinion Quarterly 40 (4): 515–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Phillip J. 2005. “George W. Bush, Edgar Allan Poe, and the Use and Abuse of Presidential Signing Statements.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 35 (3): 515–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1993. Legislative Leviathan. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the U.S. House of Representatives. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DuBay, William H. 2004. The Principles of Readability. Costa Mesa, CA: Impact Information.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Martin, Andrew D.. Segal, Jeffrey A.. and Chad Westerland. 2007. “The Judicial Common Space.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 23 (2): 303–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Segal, Jeffrey A.. 2000. “Measuring Issue Salience.” American Journal of Political Science 44 (1): 66–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Segal, Jeffrey A.. and Spaeth, Harold J.. 2007. “Digital Archive of the Papers of Harry A. Blackmun.” http://epstein.law.northwestern.edu/research/BlackmunArchive/.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Segal, Jeffrey A.. and Jennifer Nicoll Victor. 2002. “Dynamic Agenda Setting on the U.S. Supreme Court: An Empirical Assessment.” Harvard Journal on Legislation 39 (2): 395–433.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. Jr.. 1991. “Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions.” Yale Law Journal 101 (2): 331–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferejohn, John, and Charles Shipan. 1990. “Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 6 (Special Issue): 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Caldeira, Gregory A.. 1992. “The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science 36 (3): 635–64.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A.. and Baird, Vanessa A.. 1998. “On the Legitimacy of National High Courts.” American Political Science Review 92 (2): 343–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., Caldeira, Gregory A.. and Lester Kenyatta Spence. 2003. “The Supreme Court and the U.S. Presidential Election of 2000: Wounds, Self-Inflicted or Otherwise?” British Journal of Political Science 33 (4): 535–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Richard L., and Deardorff, Alan V.. 2006. “Lobbying as Legislative Subsidy.” American Political Science Review 100 (1): 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, Thomas H., Bonneau, Chris W.. and Sheehan, Reginald S.. 2005. Strategic Behavior and Policy Choice on the U.S. Supreme Court. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansford, Thomas G., and James F. Spriggs II. 2006. The Politics of Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hanson, Peter. 2010. “Taming the Senate: Party Power and the Rise of Omnibus Appropriations Bills in the U.S. Congress.” PhD diss., University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hart, Roderick P. 1984. “The Language of the Modern Presidency.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 14 (2): 249–64.Google Scholar
Hausegger, Lori, and Lawrence Baum. 1999. “Inviting Congressional Action: A Study of Supreme Court Motivations in Statutory Interpretation.” American Journal of Political Science 43 (1): 162–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Chad. M. 2007. “Strategic Selection of Legal Instruments on the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Politics Research 35 (5): 621–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1995. “Cosponsors and Wafflers from A to Z.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (4): 906–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, David S., and David Zaring. 2010. “Law versus Ideology: The Supreme Court and the Use of Legislative History.” William and Mary Law Review 51 (5): 1–62.Google Scholar
Lax, Jeffrey R., and Cameron, Charles M.. 2007. “Bargaining and Opinion Assignment on the U.S. Supreme Court.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 23 (2): 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Frances E. 2010. “Senate Deliberation and the Future of Congressional Power.” P.S.: Political Science and Politics 43 (2): 227–29.Google Scholar
Long, J. Scott, and Freese, Jeremy. 2006. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. 2nd ed. College Station, TX: Stata.Google Scholar
Martin, Andrew D., and Quinn, Kevin M.. 2002. “Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999.” Political Analysis 10 (2): 134–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCallum, Douglas R., and Peterson, James L.. 1982. “Computer-Based Readibility Indexes.” Proceedings of the ACM ’82 Conference, 44–48.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew, Roger Noll, and Barry Weingast. 1987. “Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3 (2): 243–77.Google Scholar
McCubbins, Mathew, and Thomas Schwartz. 1984. “Congressional Oversight Overlooked: Police Patrols versus Fire Alarms.” American Journal of Political Science 28 (1): 165–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, Terry M. 1987. “An Assessment of the Positive Theory of Congressional Dominance.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 12 (4): 475–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oleszek, Walter J. 2011. Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Owens, Ryan J. 2010. “The Separation of Powers and Supreme Court Agenda Setting.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (2): 412–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, Ryan J. 2011. “An Alternative Perspective on Supreme Court Agenda Setting in a System of Shared Powers.” Justice System Journal 32 (2): 183–205.Google Scholar
Owens, Ryan J., and Simon, David A.. 2012. “Explaining the Supreme Court’s Docket Size.” William and Mary Law Review 53 (4): 1219–85.Google Scholar
Owens, Ryan J., and Justin Wedeking. 2011. “Justices and Legal Clarity: Analyzing the Complexity of Supreme Court Opinions.” Law and Society Review 45 (4): 1027–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, Keith, and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Primo, David A., Binder, Sarah A.. and Forrest Maltzman. 2008. “Who Consents? Competing Pivots in Federal Judicial Selection.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 471–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, William H. 1962. The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sala, Brian R., and James F. Spriggs II. 2004. “Designing Tests of the Supreme Court and the Separation of Powers.” Political Research Quarterly 57 (2):197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schanzenbach, Max, and Tiller, Emerson H.. 2006. “Strategic Judging under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Positive Political Theory and Evidence.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 23 (1): 24–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A. 1997. “Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts.” American Political Science Review 91 (1): 28–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey A., Chad Westerland, and Stephanie Lindquist. 2011. “Congress, the Supreme Court, and Judicial Review: Testing a Constitutional Separation of Powers Model.” American Journal of Political Science 55 (1): 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 2005. Unorthodox Lawmaking: New Legislative Processes in the U.S. Congress. Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Joseph L., and Tiller, Emerson H.. 2002. “The Strategy of Judging: Evidence from Administrative Law.” Journal of Legal Studies 31 (1): 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Steven S. 1989. Call to Order: Floor Politics in the House and Senate. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Staton, Jeffrey K., and Georg Vanberg. 2008. “The Value of Vagueness: Delegation, Defiance, and Judicial Opinions.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (3): 504–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 1997. “Forward: Leaving Things Undecided.” Harvard Law Review 110 (1): 4–101.Google Scholar
Tiller, Emerson H., and Spiller, Pablo T.. 1999. “Strategic Instruments: Legal Structure and Political Games in Administrative Law.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 15 (2): 349–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman, Richard A. 2009. “Assessing the Unilateral Presidency.” In The Oxford Handbook of the American Presidency. ed. William G. Howell and George C. Edwards III, 477–98. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Scott, and Shailagh Murray. 2010. “Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama Holding up Obama Nominees for Home-State Pork.” Washington Post, February 6.Google Scholar