Assessing the Anecdotes: Amicus Curiae, Legal Rules, and the U.S. Supreme Court

Abstract

The support of amicus curiae may increase slightly the probability that the U.S. Supreme Court adopts the legal policy suggested by a litigant, but amici alone are rarely the source of legal doctrine. When amici echo the litigant's legal policy, however, they enhance the likelihood that the policy is chosen. Anecdotes that suggest that organized interests have a straightforward effect on Court policymaking appear to be just that—anecdotal. It seems instead that amici's influence on legal policy is conditional on their connection with litigants, and that they have—and may want—a less direct effect on Court policymaking than the literature suggests.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.