About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

8 J.L. & Cts. 1 (2020)

handle is hein.journals/jlawct8 and id is 1 raw text is: Strategic Opinion Language on the US Courts of Appeals JO S H U A B O S T O N, Bowling Green State University ABSTRACT What strategies do judges employ when they anticipate review? Constrained judges behave strategically by using particular instruments-like language complexity-when authoring opinions. Prior studies suggest that judges use complexity in anticipation of legislative hostility. Similarly, the threat of review and reversal may spur opinion complexity. This study examines variations in circuit court opinions resulting from pre- cedent treatment and Supreme Court preferences. When a circuit negatively treats a Supreme Court pre- cedent that the justices prefer or a circuit positively treats a precedent that the justices dislike, opinion com- plexity should increase. These hypotheses find support, suggesting that circuits strategically insulate using opinion complexity. INTRODUCTION Studies that examine strategic anticipation within the US federal judicial hierarchy have suggested, in part, that lower court outcomes are not primarily a function of judges' fear of review and reversal (e.g., Songer, Segal, and Cameron 1994; Cameron, Segal, and Songer 2000; Lax 2003). While several scholars have identified strong theoretical reasons to believe that judges might strategically change the outcomes of cases in antic- ipation of higher court judges' preferences (e.g., Cross 2003), the empirical evidence of such a relationship has been inconclusive at best (e.g., Klein and Hume 2003). I am sincerely thankful to James Spriggs, Lee Epstein, Matthew Gabel, Alice Sanford, Betsy Sinclair, Margit Tavits, Kevin McGuire, David Carlson, JB Duck-Mayr, Dino Hadzic, Jonathan Homola, Jae Hee Jung, Elif Ozdemir, Andrew Stone, Michelle Torres, Nicholas Waterbury, and the anonymous re- viewers, among others, whose thoughtful comments have significantly improved this manuscript. Fur- thermore, I am grateful for the comments I received from conference discussants and attendees includ- ing Eileen Braman, Micheal Giles, Erin Lauterbach, Ali Masood, Josh Ryan, Jacqueline Sievert, Gisela Sin, Steve Wasby, and Cara Wong. I presented previous versions of this article at the 2017 Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, the 2017 PoliInformatics Workshop, the 2018 Wash- ington University in St. Louis-University of Illinois Student Exchange, and the 2018 American Politi- cal Science Association Annual Meeting. Contact the author at jboston@bgsu.edu. Journal of Law and Courts (Spring 2020) © 2020 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved. 2164-6570/2020/0801-0001$10.00. Electronically published January 30, 2020.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most