An Empirical Analysis of Supreme Court Certiorari Petition Procedures: The Call for Response and the Call for the Views of the Solicitor General
![handle is hein.journals/gmlr16 and id is 241 raw text is: 2009]
AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF SUPREME COURT
CERTIORARI PETITION PROCEDURES:
THE CALL FOR RESPONSE AND THE CALL FOR THE
VIEWS OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
David C. Thompson and Melanie F. Wachtell
Introduction .......................................................................................... 240
I. Call for Response (or CFR) ............................................................ 245
A . P rocess .................................................................................... 246
1. The W aiver Process ........................................................... 246
2. The CFR Process ............................................................... 247
B. The Significance of a CFR ....................................................... 248
1. The Frequency of CFRs .................................................... 248
2. The Impact of a CFR on the Likelihood of a Certiorari
G rant .................................................................................. 2 50
3. The Relevance of Time of Year ........................................ 252
C. The Significance of a Waiver .................................................. 253
1. Frequency of W aiver ......................................................... 253
2. The Implications of Waiving ............................................. 255
D . The United States as a Party .................................................... 257
1. Waiver Practice of the United States as Respondent ......... 257
2. The Predictive Value of the Solicitor General's Waiver
of Response on Certiorari Denial ...................................... 258
3. Calls for Response from the United States as
R espondent ........................................................................ 260
4. Calls for Response to Cert Petitions Filed by the United
S tates ................................................................................. 2 6 1
E . States as Parties ........................................................................ 261
1. Waiver Practice of Individual States as Respondents ....... 261
2. The Predictive Value of a State's Waiver of Response
on C ertiorari D enial ........................................................... 263
3. Calls for Response from Individual States as
R espondents ...................................................................... 264
4. Calls for Response to Cert Petitions Filed by Individual
S tates ................................................................................. 2 6 5
F . Private L itigants ....................................................................... 265
1. Waiver Practice of Private Litigants as Respondents ........ 265
2. The Predictive Value of a Private Litigant's Waiver on
C ertiorari D enial ................................................................ 267
3. Calls for Response from Private Litigants as
R espondents ...................................................................... 268](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/gmlr16&div=12&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most