Last week, we began our examination of the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience since 2000 with amicus briefs, analyzing the years 2000 through 2007 on both the civil and criminal side of the docket. This week, we’ll turn our attention to the Court’s experience between 2008 and 2015.
In Table 352 below, we report the total
Yesterday, we began our review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s experience with amicus briefs with the data for civil cases between 2000 and 2007.
Amicus briefs were far less common on the criminal side of the docket during these early years of our period. The Court accepted three amicus briefs in non-unanimous criminal decisions in
Last week, we completed our review of the Illinois Supreme Court’s dissents between 2000 and 2016. Today, we begin our analysis of the Supreme Court’s amicus briefs.
We report total amicus briefs in civil cases in Table 348 below. The Court accepted 16 amicus briefs in non-unanimous decisions in 2000, 15 in 2001 and 15
Originally published on Law360, Feb. 3, 2016. Posted with permission.
For the past three years, we’ve taken a close statistical look at the previous year’s decisions from the Illinois Supreme Court to see what insights could be gained about the justices’ voting patterns and decision making dynamics. (View the 2012 analysis here, 2013
Yesterday, we addressed the Illinois Supreme Court’s standards for granting leave to file amicus briefs. Today, we turn to the data.
Civil cases which attract no amicus briefs are rare before the United States Supreme Court and a few of the state Supreme Courts, such as California. Multiple-amicus cases are not uncommon, and cases
The role of amicus curiae briefs in litigation before state Supreme Courts has been receiving scholarly attention during the past several years. Some have suggested that some interest groups have begun to see appellate litigation as merely another political arena in which to promote their policy goals.[1] Others have suggested that the explosion of