This study explores the capacity of several different theoretical perspectives to account for variation in U.S. Supreme Court Fourth Amendment decisions (whether the case outcome favored the government or the individual). The study developed measures of Richardson and Vines and Crow and Gertz commentary on legal subculture and democratic subculture concerns of the judiciary as well as negotiation/synthesis of these concerns. The study also developed and tested measures of the resource capability thesis of Galanter and the recent work of George applying social background theory to the behavior of U.S. Supreme Court justices. The findings reveal support for each of these theoretical perspectives. Implications are discussed.
AtkinsB. M. (1991). Party capability theory as an explanation for intervention behavior in the english court of appeal. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 881–903
.
2.
BaumD. (1997). Smoke and mirrors: The war on drugs and the politics of failure.
Boston, MA: Little, Brown
.
3.
BergerR. R. (2003). The “worst of both worlds”: School security and the disappearing fourth amendment rights of students. Criminal Justice Review, 28, 336–354
.
4.
BiechnerD.SpohnC. (2005). Prosecutors’ charging decision in sexual assault cases: Examining the impact of a specialized unit. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16, 461–498
.
5.
BlossW. P. (1998). Warrantless search in law enforcement workplace: Court interpretation of employer practices and employee privacy rights under the Ortego doctrine. Police Quarterly, 1, 51–69
.
6.
BradleyC. M. (1993). The court’s “two model” approach to the fourth amendment: Carpe Diem. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 84, 429–461
.
7.
BringJ. (1994). How to standardize regression coefficients. American Statistician, 48, 209–213
.
8.
BucklerK.SwattM.SalinasP. (2009). Public views of illegal immigration policy and control strategies: A test of the core hypotheses. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 317–327
.
9.
CallJ. E. (2000). The United States Supreme Court and the Fourth Amendment: Evolution from Warren to post-Warren perspectives. Criminal Justice Review, 25, 93–117
.
10.
CameronC. M.SegalJ. A.SongerD. (2000). Strategic auditing in a political hierarchy: An informational model of the Supreme Court’s certiorari decisions. American Political Science Review, 94, 101–116
.
11.
CauffmanE.PiqueroA. R.KimonisE.SteinbergL.ChassinL.FaganJ. (2007). Legal, individual, and environmental predictors of court disposition in a sample of serious adolescent offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 519–535
.
12.
ChiltonB. S.WoodsJ. A. (2006). Moral justifications on the Rehnquist court: Hercules, Herbert, and “druggies” under the fourth amendment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17, 343–361
.
13.
ChitwoodD. D.MurphyS.RosenbaumM. (2009). Reflections on the meaning of drug epidemics. Journal of Drug Issues, 39, 29–39
.
14.
CrowM. S.GertzM. (2008). Sentencing policy and disparity: Guidelines and the influence of legal and democratic subcultures. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 362–371
.
15.
EmmertC. F. (1991). Litigants in the state supreme court judicial review cases: Participation and success. Justice System Journal, 143, 486–493
.
16.
FaroleD. J.Jr. (1999). Reexamining litigant success in state supreme courts. Law and Society Review, 33, 1043–1058
.
17.
FishelJ.GabbidonS. L.HummerD. (2007). A quantitative analysis of wrongful death suits involving police officers in the United States, 1995-2005. Police Quarterly, 10, 455–471
.
18.
FranklinC. A.FearnN. E. (2008). Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory, or gender conflict?. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 279–290
.
19.
GabbidonS. L.KowalL. K.JordanK. L.RobertsJ. L.VincenziN. (2008). Race-based peremptory challenges: An empirical analysis of litigation from the U.S. court of appeals, 2002-2006. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 59–68
.
20.
GabbidonS. L.MarzetteL. N.PetersonS. A. (2007). Racial profiling and the courts: An empirical analysis of federal litigation, 1991 to 2006. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23, 226–238
.
21.
GalanterM. (1974). Why the ‘Haves’ come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of social change. Law and Society Review, 9, 95–160
.
22.
GeorgeT. E. (2007). From judge to justice: Social background theory and the Supreme Court. North Carolina Law Review, 86, 1333–1367
.
23.
GibsonC. L.SwattM. L.JolicouerJ. (2002). Assessing the generality of general strain theory: The relationship among occupational stress experienced by male police officers and domestic forms of violence. Journal of Crime and Justice, 24, 31–61
.
24.
HeiseM. (2002). The past, present, and future of empirical legal scholarship: Judicial decision making and the new empiricism. University of Illinois Law Review, 4, 819–850
.
25.
HughesT. W. (2001). Thermal imaging and the fourth amendment: Kyllo v. United States. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 26, 43–60
.
26.
HughesT. W. (2003). Bus interdiction efforts by the police: United States v. Drayton. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 197–215
.
27.
HughesT. W. (2006). Terry stops, identification requests, and the constitution in Hiibel v. The sixth judicial district of the State of Nevada: “But they just want to know your name.”. Criminal Justice Studies, 19, 275–289
.
28.
JohnsonB. D.UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. H. (2008). The social context of guideline circumvention: The case of the federal district courts. Criminology, 46, 737–783
.
29.
KritzerH. M. (2003). The government gorilla: Why does government come out ahead in appellate courts?. In KritzerH. M.SilbeyS. (Eds.), In litigation: Do the “Haves” still come out ahead?.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
.
30.
LanierM. M.MillerC. (2000). The Allen charge: Expedient justice or coercion?. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 31–40
.
31.
McCormickP. (1993). Party capability theory and appellate success in the supreme court of Canada, 1949-1992. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 26, 523–540
.
32.
McCoyC. (1996). Congress is (not) repealing the exclusionary rule! Symbolic politics and criminal justice (non)reform. Criminal Justice Review, 2, 181–196
.
33.
MisnerR. L. (1991). Justifying searches on the basis of equality of treatment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 547–578
.
NeubauerD. W. (1985). Published opinions versus summary affirmations: Criminal appeals in Louisiana. Justice System Journal, 10, 173–192
.
36.
NeubauerD. W. (1991). Winners and losers: Dispositions of criminal appeals through the Louisiana supreme Court. Justice Quarterly, 8, 85–105
.
37.
NeubauerD. W. (1992). Research note: A polycotomous measure of appellate court outcomes: The case of criminal appeals. Justice System Journal, 16, 75–87
.
38.
NixonD. C.HaskinJ. D. (2000). Judicial retirement strategies—The judge’s role in influencing party control of the appellate courts. American Politics Quarterly, 28, 458–489
.
39.
OrcuttJ. D.TurnerJ. B. (1993). Shocking numbers and graphic accounts: Quantified images of drug problems in the print media. Social Problems, 40, 190–206
.
40.
PhillipsS.GrattetR. (2000). Judicial rhetoric, meaning-making, and the institutionalization of hate crime law. Law and Society Review, 34, 567–606
.
41.
PinelloD. R. (1999). Linking party to judicial ideology in American courts: A meta-analysis. Justice System Journal, 20, 219–254
.
42.
RadeletM. L.VandiverM. (1983). The Florida Supreme Court and death penalty appeals. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 74, 913–926
.
43.
ReinarmanC.LevineH. (1989). Crack in context: Politics and media in the making of a drug scare. Contemporary Drug Problems, 16, 535–577
.
44.
RichardsonR. J.VinesK. N. (1970). The politics of federal courts: Lower courts in the United States.
Boston, MA: Little, Brown
.
45.
SavelsbergJ. (1992). Law that does not fit society: Sentencing guidelines as a neoclassical reaction to the dilemmas of substantivized law. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1346–1381
.
46.
ScottK. M. (2006). Understanding judicial hierarchy: Reversals and the behavior of intermediate appellate judges. Law and Society Review, 40, 163–191
.
47.
SegalJ. A. (1984). Predicting supreme court cases probabilistically: The search and seizure cases, 1962-1981. American Political Science Review, 78, 891–900
.
48.
SevignyE. L. (2009). Excessive uniformity in federal drug sentencing. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 25, 155–180
.
49.
SheehanR. S.MishlerW.SongerD. R. (1992). Ideology, status, and the differential success of direct parties before the supreme court. American Political Science Review, 86, 464–471
.
50.
SimmonsR. (2007). Why 2007 is not like 1984: A broader perspective on technology’s effect on privacy and fourth amendment jurisprudence. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 97, 531–568
.
51.
SmithC. E. (2003). The Rehnquist court and criminal justice: An empirical assessment. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 19, 161–181
.
52.
SmythR. (2000). The ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have Nots’: An empirical study of the rational actor and party capability hypotheses in the high court 1948-99. Australian Journal of Political Science, 35, 255–274
.
53.
SongerD. R.GinnM. H.SarverT. A. (2003). Do judges follow the law when there is no fear of reversal?. Justice System Journal, 24, 137–161
.
54.
SwattM. L. (2002). Demeanor and arrest revisited: Reconsidering the direct effect of demeanor. Journal of Crime and Justice, 25, 23–39
.
55.
SwattM. L.HeN. (2006). Exploring the difference between male and female intimate homicides: Revisiting the concept of situated transactions. Homicide Studies, 10, 1–14
.
56.
ToobinJ. (2007). The nine: Inside the secret world of the Supreme Court.
New York, NY: Anchor Books
.
57.
VaughnM. S.del CarmenR. V. (1997). The fourth amendment as a tool of actuarial justice: The “special needs” exception to the warrant and probable cause requirements. Crime and Delinquency, 43, 78–103
.
58.
WeberM. (1968). Economy and society.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press
.
59.
WilliamsC. R.ArrigoB. A. (1999). Discerning the margins of constitutional encroachment: The drug courier profile in the airport milieu. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 31–46
.
60.
WilliamsJ. J. (1991). Predicting decisions rendered in criminal appeals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 19, 463–469
.
61.
WilliamsJ. J. (1994). Controlling the judge’s discretion: Appellate review of departures. Justice System Journal, 17, 229–240
.
62.
WilliamsJ. J. (1995a). Race of the appellant, sentencing guidelines, and decision-making in criminal appeals: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice, 23, 83–91
.
63.
WilliamsJ. J. (1995b). Type of counsel and the outcome of criminal appeals: A research note. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 19, 276–285
.
64.
WilliamsM. R.DemuthS.HolcombJ. E. (2007). Understanding the influence of victim gender in death penalty cases: The importance of victim race, sex-related victimization, and jury decision making. Criminology, 45, 865–891
.
65.
WorrallJ. L. (2000). Constitutional issues in reality-based police television programs: Media ride-alongs. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 41–64
.
66.
WorrallJ. L. (2001). The reasonably unreasonable police officer: A paradox in police civil liability jurisprudence. Policing—An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 24, 449–469
.
67.
YeagerD. B. (1993). Search, seizure and the positive law: Expectations of privacy outside the fourth amendment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 84, 249–309
.
