I Respectfully Dissent: Consensus, Agendas, And Policymaking On The U.S. Supreme Court, 1888-1999

Scholars have been intrigued by the abrupt change in the rate of nonconsensual opinions that the Supreme Court has published over time, which substantially increased beginning with the battles cancerning the court\u27s New Deal transition in the 1930s. Notwithstanding, none of the prior studies on this topic has made any link, whether theoretical or empirical, between the Supreme Court\u27s issuance of these special opinions and the justices\u27 policy preferences. We utilize fractional cointegration to examine the relationship between consensus, agendas, and decisionmaking on the Supreme Court. We find that there is a systematic interrelation between the justices\u27 policy preferences and their issuance of nonconsensual opinions that is dependent upon the policy agenda before the court. In turn, this connection influences the court\u27s policy outcomes, demonstrating that the justices\u27 behavior regarding nonconsensual opinion writing is a classic example of judicial policymaking. © 2004 by The Policy Studies Association. All rights reserved