Two leading scholars of the Supreme Court explain and predict its decision making.

The behaviour and decision-making processes of the US Supreme Court have often been examined using the legal model, which holds that Supreme Court decisions are based on the 'plain meaning' of the Constitution, the intent of the framers and precedent. This book investigates the decisions and the decision-making processes of the Supreme Court using an alternative framework: the attitudinal model, which holds that Supreme Court decisions are based on the attitudes and values of justices. Using the highly reliable US Supreme Court Judicial Data Base, compiled by Professor Spaeth, the authors examine all stages of the Court's decision-making processes, from staffing and access, to case selection, votes on the merits, opinion assignments and opinion coalitions, and judicial restraint and activism, and manage to explain and predict behaviour with a greater degree of accuracy. They also include a framework for understanding the impact of judicial decisions and the place of the Court in the American political system.

"The Supreme Court Compendium: Data, Decisions, and Developments is a comprehensive collection of information on the Court and the justices -- past and present. The authors have enriched the second edition not only by adding current information to the tables now include data from the Vinson Court era drawn from the newly expanded U.S. Supreme Court Judicial Database. The second edition also features a list of Internet sites relating to the Court." -- Back cover.

This book examines the American legal system, including a comprehensive treatment of the U.S. Supreme Court. Despite this treatment, the 'in' from the title deserves emphasis, for it extensively examines lower courts, providing separate chapters on state courts, the US District Courts, and the US Courts of Appeals. The book analyzes these courts from a legal/extralegal framework, drawing different conclusions about the relative influence of each based on institutional structures and empirical evidence. The book is also tied together through its attention to the relationship between lower courts and the Supreme Court. Additionally, Election 2000 litigation provides a common substantive topic linking many of the chapters. Finally, it provides extended coverage to the legal process, with separate chapters on civil procedure, evidence, and criminal procedure.

The Choices Justices Make is a groundbreaking work that offers a strategic account of Supreme Court decision making. Justices realize that their ability to achieve their policy and other goals depends on the preferences of other actors, the choices they expect others to make, and the institutional context in which they act. All these factors hold sway over justices as they make their decisions, from which cases to accept, to how to interact with their colleagues, and what policies to adopt in their opinions. Choices is a thought-provoking, yet nontechnical work that is an ideal supplement for judicial process and public law courses. In addition to offering a unique and sustained theoretical account, the authors tell a fascinating story of how the Court works. Data culled from the Court′s public records and from the private papers of Justices Brennan, Douglas, Marshall, and Powell provide empirical evidence to support the central argument, while numerous examples from the justices′ papers animate the work.

The author hopes to educate the public regarding white nationalists.

How do Supreme Court justices decide their cases? Do they follow their policy preferences? Or are they constrained by the law and by other political actors? The Constrained Court combines new theoretical insights and extensive data analysis to show that law and politics together shape the behavior of justices on the Supreme Court. Michael Bailey and Forrest Maltzman show how two types of constraints have influenced the decision making of the modern Court. First, Bailey and Maltzman document that important legal doctrines, such as respect for precedents, have influenced every justice since 1950. The authors find considerable variation in how these doctrines affect each justice, variation due in part to the differing experiences justices have brought to the bench. Second, Bailey and Maltzman show that justices are constrained by political factors. Justices are not isolated from what happens in the legislative and executive branches, and instead respond in predictable ways to changes in the preferences of Congress and the president. The Constrained Court shatters the myth that justices are unconstrained actors who pursue their personal policy preferences at all costs. By showing how law and politics interact in the construction of American law, this book sheds new light on the unique role that the Supreme Court plays in the constitutional order.