Abstract
This paper presents a model of the Supreme Court's certiorari behavior. The analysis assumes that the Court accepts or rejects a case according to the individual justice's perceptions of how deciding the case will affect the law. The model generates two testable hypotheses. First, there is a positive relationship, ceteris paribus, between voting to grant certiorari and voting with the majority on the final decision. This hypothesis is somewhat similar to Brenner's and diametrically opposed to Provine's. Second, there is a positive relationship, ceteris paribus, between voting to grant certiorari and voting to reverse the lower court's decision. This hypothesis is similar to those developed by Ulmer, Baum, Brenner, and Provine although their underlying models are quite different. Both the hypotheses presented in this paper are supported by a maximum-likelihood logistic analysis of 512 cases decided by the Court between 1947 and 1956.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
