Actions, Factions, and Interactions: Newsworthy Influences onSupremeCourt Coverage*

Abstract

ObjectivesWe test whetherSupremeCourt media coverage (in terms of both overall volume and specific frames) is driven byCourt actions, by factional battles on theCourt, by theCourt's interaction with other governmental actors, or by all three.MethodsWe link elements of theSpaethSupremeCourtDatabase and real‐worldSupremeCourt and political events toAssociatedPress media coverage of the judicial branch over a nearly three‐decade span. Content analysis of the media coverage is performed and empirical relationships between decisions, events, and coverage are analyzed using error correction modeling.ResultsWe find that overall coverage of theCourt is driven by the ideological nature of decisions rendered and by judicial retirements. Legal coverage of theCourt is driven by issues of constitutionality. Political coverage of theCourt is driven by majority size and judicial retirements.ConclusionsThe findings speak to the newsworthiness ofCourt action, factional battles on theCourt, and moments where theCourt interacts with outsiders. Elements of all three shapes the types of stories journalists tell and the ways in which said stories are told.