The Effect of Opinion Readability on the Impact of US Supreme Court Precedents in State High Courts

被引:9
|
作者
Fix, Michael P. [1 ]
Fairbanks, Bailey R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Georgia State Univ, Atlanta, GA 30302 USA
关键词
LEGAL PRECEDENT; LAW; TRANSMISSION; RESPONSES; CLARITY;
D O I
10.1111/ssqu.12752
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Objective This article examines whether more readable U.S. Supreme Court opinions are cited with greater frequency in state courts of last resort. Methods We use random slope, random intercept multilevel models to analyze 30 years of state high court citations to U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions issued during the 1987-2006 terms. Results Our analysis reveals that opinion readability exerts a strong substantive impact on citation rates. This effect holds while accounting for a variety of factors previously shown to influence citation rates. Conclusion Institutional constraints, workload considerations, and audience costs should lead state high courts to find clearly written opinions more attractive than jargon-laden ones. This makes the readability of a U.S. Supreme Court precedent a useful heuristic for state courts when selecting among potential relevant precedents. As these courts play a major role in implementing U.S Supreme Court decisions, our findings indicate that the readability of U.S. Supreme Court opinions has a strong effect on their long-term impact.
引用
收藏
页码:811 / 824
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Bargaining on the US Supreme Court: Justices' responses to majority opinion drafts
    Spriggs, JF
    Maltzman, F
    Wahlbeck, PJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 1999, 61 (02): : 485 - 506
  • [32] Agenda control, the median justice, and the majority opinion on the US Supreme Court
    Bonneau, Chris W.
    Hammond, Thomas H.
    Maltzman, Forrest
    Wahlbeck, Paul J.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2007, 51 (04) : 890 - 905
  • [33] The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on US Supreme Court Opinion Content
    Collins, Paul M., Jr.
    Corley, Pamela C.
    Hamner, Jesse
    [J]. LAW & SOCIETY REVIEW, 2015, 49 (04) : 917 - 944
  • [34] Deliberation Rules and Opinion Assignment Procedures in State Supreme Courts: A Replication
    Hughes, David A.
    Wilhelm, Teena
    Vining, Richard L., Jr.
    [J]. JUSTICE SYSTEM JOURNAL, 2015, 36 (04) : 395 - 410
  • [35] Status characteristics and their intersectionality: majority opinion assignment in state supreme courts
    Kaheny, Erin B.
    Szmer, John
    Christensen, Robert K.
    [J]. POLITICS GROUPS AND IDENTITIES, 2020, 8 (05) : 894 - 917
  • [36] High Court Recruitment of Female Clerks: A Comparative Analysis of the US Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Canada
    Kaheny, Erin B.
    Szmer, John J.
    Hansen, Michael A.
    Scheurer, Katherine Felix
    [J]. JUSTICE SYSTEM JOURNAL, 2015, 36 (04) : 355 - 377
  • [37] Making Courts Matter: Politics and the Implementation of State Supreme Court Decisions
    Berry, Christopher
    Wysong, Charles
    [J]. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW REVIEW, 2012, 79 (01): : 1 - 29
  • [38] Gender and Judicial Replacement THE CASE OF US STATE SUPREME COURTS
    Arrington, Nancy B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LAW AND COURTS, 2018, 6 (01) : 127 - 154
  • [39] Intracourt Dialogue The Impact of US Supreme Court Dissents
    Corley, Pamela
    Ward, Artemus
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LAW AND COURTS, 2020, 8 (01) : 27 - 50
  • [40] JUDICIAL IMPACT AND STATE SUPREME COURTS - TARR,GA
    不详
    [J]. EMORY LAW JOURNAL, 1980, 29 (01) : 306 - 306