Presentation Title

The Supreme Court: a deeper look at the attorneys effectiveness

Presenter Information

Kristen Khair, Cal Poly PomonaFollow

Faculty Mentor

Dr. Mario Guerrero

Start Date

18-11-2017 10:00 AM

End Date

18-11-2017 11:00 AM

Location

BSC-Ursa Minor 7

Session

Poster 1

Type of Presentation

Poster

Subject Area

behavioral_social_sciences

Abstract

The Supreme Court is the ultimate decision maker in determining what laws we follow in our everyday lives, but is the Court’s opinion affected by the parties who present cases to the Court? This paper examines whether attorneys within the last 5 years have been able to affect the outcome on cases that are partisanly divided in the Supreme Court. This paper will argue that when a politically polarized issue is heard before the Supreme Court, the justices are more likely to be influenced by their own previously held political beliefs as oppose to the argument made by the attorneys before the Court. This study uses quantitative analysis, specifically a content analysis, focusing on oral arguments that have been heard before the Supreme Court. Through this analysis, I was able to find that an attorney does have an effect, but in cases that are partisanly divided, the effect is limited. Justices in the Supreme Court are basing their decisions based off of issues they know to be true or based off their own interpretation of the Constitution. Therefore an attorney’s oral argument is not the primary reason for a Justice’s decision making.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Nov 18th, 10:00 AM Nov 18th, 11:00 AM

The Supreme Court: a deeper look at the attorneys effectiveness

BSC-Ursa Minor 7

The Supreme Court is the ultimate decision maker in determining what laws we follow in our everyday lives, but is the Court’s opinion affected by the parties who present cases to the Court? This paper examines whether attorneys within the last 5 years have been able to affect the outcome on cases that are partisanly divided in the Supreme Court. This paper will argue that when a politically polarized issue is heard before the Supreme Court, the justices are more likely to be influenced by their own previously held political beliefs as oppose to the argument made by the attorneys before the Court. This study uses quantitative analysis, specifically a content analysis, focusing on oral arguments that have been heard before the Supreme Court. Through this analysis, I was able to find that an attorney does have an effect, but in cases that are partisanly divided, the effect is limited. Justices in the Supreme Court are basing their decisions based off of issues they know to be true or based off their own interpretation of the Constitution. Therefore an attorney’s oral argument is not the primary reason for a Justice’s decision making.