Abstract
Why do justices use emotional appeals in their opinions? I explain this strategic decision using a theory based on conflict and audience. In non-salient cases, justices primarily speak to legal audiences. As cases become more salient, justices also cater to increasingly relevant non-legal audiences. This is especially true for dissenters, who seek to expand conflict and mobilize opposition through the use of emotional appeals when they find themselves in the losing coalition. My results confirm these expectations. They suggest that justices are engaged in a policy battle that does not end upon publication of Supreme Court opinions. Each coalition continues to fight for their position through the content of opinions they write, by playing to the strengths and biases of relevant audiences.
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.
