Consider the Source (and the Message): Supreme Court Justices and Strategic Audits of Lower Court Decisions

Abstract

Given scarce resources, Supreme Court justices hear cases that maximize their auditing function. Building on existing theories, we argue that justices rely on the identity of lower court judges and the ideological disposition of lower court decisions to decide which cases to review. We find that justices are most likely to audit disagreeable lower court decisions rendered by ideologically disagreeable judges and are least likely to review agreeable lower court decisions rendered by ideologically agreeable judges. Further, when faced with the same ideologically disagreeable lower court decision, justices are less likely to review those decisions made by ideological allies than those made by ideological foes.