U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

STUDY OF THE SUPREME COURT'S CASELOAD

NCJ Number
25576
Journal
Journal of Legal Studies Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: (JUNE 1974) Pages: 339-375
Author(s)
G CASPER; R A POSNER
Date Published
1974
Length
37 pages
Annotation
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF CHANGES (PARTICULARLY THE RAPID GROWTH) OVER TIME WITHIN SPECIFIC SUBJECT-MATTER AREAS OF CASES FILED WITH THE COURT BETWEEN 1957-58 AND 1971-72.
Abstract
IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE INCREASE IN THE COURT'S CASELOAD SINCE 1957 APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A CONSEQUENCE IN MAJOR PART OF THE COURT'S SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS, AND TO A LESSER EXTENT OF NEW LEGISLATION. IN ADDITION, THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES TO INDIGENT DEFENDANTS HAS PROBABLY PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN THE GROWTH OF THE CASELOAD, BUT THIS FACTOR IS PARTLY A CONSEQUENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT'S EXPANSIVE INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO COUNSEL. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT THE CASELOAD INCREASE IS THE INEXORABLE RESULT OF INCREASES IN POPULATION, NATIONAL INCOME, OR OTHER INDICES OF SOCIAL ACTIVITY. HAD THERE BEEN NO EXPANSION OF THE RIGHTS AND COURT ACCESS OF LITIGANTS, THE COURT'S CASELOAD MIGHT NOT HAVE INCREASED. IT IS ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THE VALUE OF FILING AN APPLICATION FOR REVIEW WITH THE SUPREME COURT IS A FUNCTION IN PART OF THE PROBABILITY THAT REVIEW WILL BE GRANTED, AND AS THAT PROBABILITY DECLINES OVER TIME DUE TO INCREASES IN THE NUMBER OF CASES FILED COUPLED WITH THE COURT'S INABILITY TO INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT IT ACCEPTS FOR REVIEW, THE VALUE OF SEEKING REVIEW WILL FALL, AND, OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, THE NUMBER OF CASES SHOULD DECLINE. THE ANALYSIS ALSO REVEALED A SIGNIFICANT BUT NOT EXTREMELY LARGE INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT JUSTICES ARE REQUIRED TO DEVOTE TO THE TASK OF SCREENING APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW, AND FOUND THAT THE COURT IS PROBABLY REFUSING TO REVIEW CASES THAT WOULD HAVE MET ITS STANDARDS FOR GRANTING REVIEW WHEN ITS CASELOAD WAS SMALLER. PROPOSALS FOR REDUCING THE COURT'S CASELOAD ARE EVALUATED AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STATISTICAL RESEARCH ARE PRESENTED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)

Downloads

No download available

Availability