Lower Court Influence on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

Corley, Pamela C.; Collins, Paul M.; Calvin, Bryan

doi:10.1017/s0022381610000848

Cited by 82 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To calculate this, we relied on the plagiarism detection software, WCopyfind 4.1.1 (Bloomfield ), which allows us to compare two documents for the purpose of establishing the extent to which they share common words in phrases. Although originally created to investigate plagiarism by college students, WCopyfind has been successfully extended to a variety of social science applications, including investigations of media coverage of presidential speeches (Eshbaugh‐Soha ), agenda setting in the senate (Grimmer ), and the content of Supreme Court opinions (Black and Owens 2012; Corley ; Corley, Collins, and Calvin ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This indicates that majority opinions incorporate less language from amicus briefs than party briefs and lower court opinions. For example, Corley () reports that majority opinions borrow an average of 9.8 percent of language from party briefs, and Corley, Collins, and Calvin () reveal that 4.3 percent comes from the opinions of the lower federal courts who initially handled the litigation (compared with an average of 2.7 percent for amicus briefs). This is an interesting finding as it indicates that majority opinions are more focused on the direct parties to litigation and the lower courts being reviewed than amicus briefs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

Collins¹,

Corley²,

Hamner³

2015

Law Soc Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We address fundamental questions about the ability of interest groups to shape public policy by examining the influence of amicus curiae briefs on U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion content. We argue that the justices will incorporate language from amicus briefs into their opinions based on the extent to which the amicus briefs contribute to their ability to make effective law and policy. Using plagiarism detection software and other forms of computer assisted content analysis, we find that the justices adopt language from amicus briefs based primarily on the quality of the brief's argument, the level of repetition in the brief, the ideological position advocated in the brief, and the identity of the amicus. These results add fresh insight into how interest groups influence the development of federal law by the Supreme Court.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

Collins¹,

Corley²,

Hamner³

2015

Law Soc Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beyond this article's primary contribution to a greater understanding of the connection between the language of court opinions and treatment by lower courts, this research corroborates the value of using computerized text analysis to understand judicial opinions. Much can be learned by employing computer‐based text analysis programs (Owens & Wedeking ), such as the LWIC software used here (e.g., Owens & Wedeking ) as well as other automated methods (e.g., Corley ; Corley, Collins, & Calvin ; Laver, Benoit, & Garry ). For example, future research might use the LWIC software to evaluate whether more certain language used in parties' briefs leads to more favorable outcomes or whether it influences the extent to which the Supreme Court borrows from the parties' briefs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The (Dis)Advantage of Certainty: The Importance of Certainty in Language

Corley¹,

Wedeking²

2014

Law Soc Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can legal decision makers increase the likelihood of a favorable response from other legal and social actors? To answer this, we propose a novel theory based on the certainty expressed in language that is applicable to many different legal contexts. The theory is grounded in psychology and legal advocacy and suggests that expressing certainty enhances the persuasiveness of a message. We apply this theory to the principal–agent framework to examine the treatment of Supreme Court precedent by the Federal Courts of Appeal. We find that as the level of certainty in the Supreme Court's opinion increases, the lower courts are more likely to positively treat the Court's decision. We then discuss the implications of our findings for using certainty in a broader context.

show abstract

“…Our approach is similar to that used in other studies (see Allee and Lugg, 2016;Corley et al, 2011;Spirling, 2012) and is particularly useful for analyzing legal language where word order is meaningful. Our approach is similar to that used in other studies (see Allee and Lugg, 2016;Corley et al, 2011;Spirling, 2012) and is particularly useful for analyzing legal language where word order is meaningful.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Is the European Union Trade Deal with Canada New or Recycled? A Text‐as‐data Approach

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are the rules in the Canada‐European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) largely copied from past trade agreements, or are they new and potentially groundbreaking? Some critics charge that CETA merely replicates the failures of past trade deals, while others worry that CETA is specifying new ‘behind the border’ rules that threaten state sovereignty. Using text analysis we compare the contents in CETA to those in previous trade agreements signed by both parties. Unlike many other recent trade deals, we find that much of the content in CETA is indeed novel. On average only about 7 per cent of CETA language is copied directly from any of the 49 previous trade agreements we analyze. This same pattern holds across many of the most controversial issue areas, like investment. Some recent agreements like EU‐Singapore (30%) and Canada‐South Korea (24%) are replicated in part in CETA, although recycled text is more likely to come from past Canadian PTAs than EU ones. Our results suggest that fears that CETA is ‘more of the same’ are overblown and indicate that if ratified CETA likely will play an important role as a model in future trade agreements.

show abstract

Lower Court Influence on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

Cited by 82 publications

References 27 publications

The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Content

The (Dis)Advantage of Certainty: The Importance of Certainty in Language

Is the European Union Trade Deal with Canada New or Recycled? A Text‐as‐data Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About