This book examines state Supreme Court decision making during controversies involving religion, race, and gender skirmishes. It analyzes predominant factors influencing state Supreme Court decision making during controversies involving justices serving in these courts and confronting these crises.

Written opinions are the primary means by which judges communicate with external actors. These sentiments include the parties to the case itself, but also more broadly journalists, public officials, lawyers, other judges, and increasingly, the mass public. In Creating the Law, Michael K. Romano and Todd A. Curry examine the extent to which judges tailor their language in order to avoid retribution during their retention, and how institutional variations involving intra-chamber dynamics may influence the written word of a legal opinion. Using an extensive dataset that includes the text of all death penalty and education decisions issued by state supreme courts from 1995–2010, Romano and Curry are the first to examine the connection between retention incentives and language choices. They utilize text analysis techniques developed in the field of communications and apply them to the text of judicial decisions. In doing so, they find that judges write with their audience in mind, and emphasize duelling strategies of justification and persuasion in order to please diverse audiences that may be paying attention. Furthermore, the process of drafting a majority opinion is a team exercise, and when more individuals are involved in its crafting, the product will reflect this complexity. This book gives students the tools for understanding how institutional variation affects judicial outcomes and shows how language relates to decision-making in the judiciary more specifically.

What influences decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court? For decades social scientists focused on the ideology of individual justices. Supreme Court Decision Making moves beyond this focus by exploring how justices are influenced by the distinctive features of courts as institutions and their place in the political system. Drawing on interpretive-historical institutionalism as well as rational choice theory, a group of leading scholars consider such factors as the influence of jurisprudence, the unique characteristics of supreme courts, the dynamics of coalition building, and the effects of social movements. The volume's distinguished contributors and broad range make it essential reading for those interested either in the Supreme Court or the nature of institutional politics. Original essays contributed by Lawrence Baum, Paul Brace, Elizabeth Bussiere, Cornell Clayton, Sue Davis, Charles Epp, Lee Epstein, Howard Gillman, Melinda Gann Hall, Ronald Kahn, Jack Knight, Forrest Maltzman, David O'Brien, Jeffrey Segal, Charles Sheldon, James Spriggs II, and Paul Wahlbeck.

This book argues that the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, should embrace an interpretive framework that promotes equal participation in the democratic process, fosters accountability, and facilitates robust public discourse among citizens of all backgrounds. The authors propose a solution that strives to restore integrity to the Court’s decision-making process by eschewing ideology and a focus on the utility of outcomes in favor of an intellectually honest jurisprudence that gives all citizens a meaningful voice in governance. The work is divided into seven parts. Parts I–V identify the worst decisions in the Court history and the common themes that helped produce them. The chapters within each part are dedicated to a single Supreme Court decision, in which the authors analyze the Court’s reasoning and explain why it undermined federalism, separation of powers, and democratic governance. Additionally, the authors explain why these decisions compromised the relationship between the Court and coordinate branches, the federal government and the states, and citizens and their elected representatives. Part VI identifies several of the best Supreme Court decisions, and explains why they provide a principled framework that can be applied in other cases and result in a pro-democracy jurisprudence. Finally, in Part VII the authors propose a comprehensive solution that should inform the Justices’ judicial philosophies, regardless of ideology, and strive to promote an equal and participatory democracy. The final chapter offers concluding thoughts and argues that a healthy democracy is the foundation upon which equality rests, and that a collective view of rights is the path by which to restore liberty for all citizens.

Scott, James Brown. Judicial Settlement of Controversies between States of the American Union: An Analysis of Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of the United States. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1919. xiii, 548 pp. Reprinted 2002 by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. LCCN 00-066333. ISBN 1-58477-172-0. Cloth. $120. * This volume offers the texts of eighty Supreme Court decisions written between 1799 and 1918 concerning controversies between states, along with extensive analyses and commentaries. These are preceded by three general chapters that examine the rise of judicial procedure between the states, the ability of states to be sued by citizens of other states, and attempts by citizens of states to bring action against other states by methods of indirection. As indicated by the final chapter, "A Lesson For the World at Large," the author has a larger goal in mind. Deeply influenced by the devastation of the First World War, Scott [1866-1943], a participant in the Versailles Conference, aimed to demonstrate that the American legal system that maintains peace between the individual states could serve as a model for the rest of the world.

The US Supreme Court is arguably the most controversial institution in the American political system. Decisions on such 'hot-button' issues as abortion, race equality, the death penalty and gay marriage have sharply divided the Court, politicians and public opinion. Some say that the Justices are merely politicians in judicial robes, while others insist that the Court simply does its best to interpret the Constitution for a society that differs drastically from the late eighteenth century when it was written. All those studying or simply interested in American politics must therefore get to grips with the nature, power and role of the Supreme Court in American politics. This book provides a comprehensive and balanced account, written and organised in an accessible style. It assumes no prior knowledge of the Court or constitutional law, and will help readers to gain a full appreciation of this much-criticised and important institution.