Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court

Eve M. Ringsmuth; Amanda C. Bryan; Timothy R. Johnson

doi:10.1177/1065912912442111

Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court

Eve M. Ringsmuth, Amanda C. Bryan, Timothy R. Johnson

Political Science (Twin Cities)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although scholars have established that oral arguments play a role in Supreme Court decision making, a fundamental question remains: can oral arguments change justices' votes? Using data on the positions taken by Justices Blackmun and Powell prior to oral arguments, the authors seek to answer this question while implicitly addressing another: how effectively can attorneys persuade the Court during arguments dominated by justices attempting to persuade each other? The authors find that in a significant minority of cases, justices are persuaded to switch their vote as a result of oral argument and that high-quality attorneys play a central role in that persuasion.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	429-440
Number of pages	12
Journal	Political Research Quarterly
Volume	66
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912912442111
State	Published - Jun 2013

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article: Ringsmuth thanks University of Minnesota′s Patrick and Kathy Lewis Thesis Research Grant and Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship for facilitating data collection, and Johnson acknowledges assistance from the National Science Foundation: IIS-0324992.

Keywords

Supreme Court
oral arguments
persuasion
voting fluidity

Access

10.1177/1065912912442111

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

@article{2d1656dc953442a49316723bcbc690d5,

title = "Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court",

abstract = "Although scholars have established that oral arguments play a role in Supreme Court decision making, a fundamental question remains: can oral arguments change justices' votes? Using data on the positions taken by Justices Blackmun and Powell prior to oral arguments, the authors seek to answer this question while implicitly addressing another: how effectively can attorneys persuade the Court during arguments dominated by justices attempting to persuade each other? The authors find that in a significant minority of cases, justices are persuaded to switch their vote as a result of oral argument and that high-quality attorneys play a central role in that persuasion.",

keywords = "Supreme Court, oral arguments, persuasion, voting fluidity",

author = "Ringsmuth, {Eve M.} and Bryan, {Amanda C.} and Johnson, {Timothy R.}",

note = "Funding Information: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article: Ringsmuth thanks University of Minnesota′s Patrick and Kathy Lewis Thesis Research Grant and Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship for facilitating data collection, and Johnson acknowledges assistance from the National Science Foundation: IIS-0324992. ",

year = "2013",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1177/1065912912442111",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "66",

pages = "429--440",

journal = "Political Research Quarterly",

issn = "1065-9129",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court

AU - Ringsmuth, Eve M.

AU - Bryan, Amanda C.

AU - Johnson, Timothy R.

N1 - Funding Information: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article: Ringsmuth thanks University of Minnesota′s Patrick and Kathy Lewis Thesis Research Grant and Doctoral Dissertation Fellowship for facilitating data collection, and Johnson acknowledges assistance from the National Science Foundation: IIS-0324992.

PY - 2013/6

Y1 - 2013/6

N2 - Although scholars have established that oral arguments play a role in Supreme Court decision making, a fundamental question remains: can oral arguments change justices' votes? Using data on the positions taken by Justices Blackmun and Powell prior to oral arguments, the authors seek to answer this question while implicitly addressing another: how effectively can attorneys persuade the Court during arguments dominated by justices attempting to persuade each other? The authors find that in a significant minority of cases, justices are persuaded to switch their vote as a result of oral argument and that high-quality attorneys play a central role in that persuasion.

AB - Although scholars have established that oral arguments play a role in Supreme Court decision making, a fundamental question remains: can oral arguments change justices' votes? Using data on the positions taken by Justices Blackmun and Powell prior to oral arguments, the authors seek to answer this question while implicitly addressing another: how effectively can attorneys persuade the Court during arguments dominated by justices attempting to persuade each other? The authors find that in a significant minority of cases, justices are persuaded to switch their vote as a result of oral argument and that high-quality attorneys play a central role in that persuasion.

KW - Supreme Court

KW - oral arguments

KW - persuasion

KW - voting fluidity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876986783&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876986783&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1065912912442111

DO - 10.1177/1065912912442111

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84876986783

SN - 1065-9129

VL - 66

SP - 429

EP - 440

JO - Political Research Quarterly

JF - Political Research Quarterly

IS - 2

ER -

Voting Fluidity and Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme Court

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this