In rare instances, a Supreme Court justice may elect to call attention to his or her displeasure with a majority decision by reading a dissenting opinion from the bench. We document this phenomenon by constructing a data set from audio files of Court proceedings and news accounts. We then test a model explaining why justices use this practice selectively by analyzing ideological, strategic, and institutional variables. Judicial review, formal alteration of precedent, size of majority coalition, and issue area influence this behavior. Ideological distance between the dissenter and majority opinion writer produces a counterintuitive relationship. We suspect that reading a dissent is an action selectively undertaken when bargaining and accommo...
The United States Supreme Court has in recent years been supplying fascinating material for students...
Although academics have long recognized that institutions such as opinion-assignment procedures and ...
The right of an individual to dissent from the ideas of his or her peers, or even his or her governm...
This paper develops and tests a model of self-interested judicial behavior to explore the phenomenon...
In this Article we offer the first comprehensive evaluation of oral dissenting on the Supreme Court....
In the US Court of Appeals, a panel of judges can vote to rehear a case which had previously been he...
article published in law journalThe United States Supreme Court's connection to the ideal of the rul...
The article focuses on the benefits of the extended deliberative process and addresses the practice ...
Why do justices author or join separate opinions? Most attempts to address the dynamics of con-curre...
This paper examines the oral dissents of Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg from the ye...
In the collegial world of appellate judging, where the dominant impulse is consensus, dissents depar...
none1siIn several Courts of last resort, judges are permitted to publish a dissenting opinion. This ...
When dissents are allowed, judges must decide whether or when to write them. While the main insights...
Federal courts are a mainstay of the justice system in the United States. In this study, we analyze ...
Despite recent critical interest in legal discourse, few scholars have studied Supreme Court dissent...
The United States Supreme Court has in recent years been supplying fascinating material for students...
Although academics have long recognized that institutions such as opinion-assignment procedures and ...
The right of an individual to dissent from the ideas of his or her peers, or even his or her governm...
This paper develops and tests a model of self-interested judicial behavior to explore the phenomenon...
In this Article we offer the first comprehensive evaluation of oral dissenting on the Supreme Court....
In the US Court of Appeals, a panel of judges can vote to rehear a case which had previously been he...
article published in law journalThe United States Supreme Court's connection to the ideal of the rul...
The article focuses on the benefits of the extended deliberative process and addresses the practice ...
Why do justices author or join separate opinions? Most attempts to address the dynamics of con-curre...
This paper examines the oral dissents of Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg from the ye...
In the collegial world of appellate judging, where the dominant impulse is consensus, dissents depar...
none1siIn several Courts of last resort, judges are permitted to publish a dissenting opinion. This ...
When dissents are allowed, judges must decide whether or when to write them. While the main insights...
Federal courts are a mainstay of the justice system in the United States. In this study, we analyze ...
Despite recent critical interest in legal discourse, few scholars have studied Supreme Court dissent...
The United States Supreme Court has in recent years been supplying fascinating material for students...
Although academics have long recognized that institutions such as opinion-assignment procedures and ...
The right of an individual to dissent from the ideas of his or her peers, or even his or her governm...