Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

File List


osu1092422764.pdf (650.98 KB)

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

The U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of petitions in Forma Pauperis

Watson, Wendy Lyn
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1092422764

Abstract Details

2004, Doctor of Philosophy, Ohio State University, Political Science.
This dissertation explores the question of whether, how, and how much the U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of paid petitions differs from its selection of petitions in forma pauperis, or IFP petitions – those petitions filed by individuals who are financially unable to pay the Court’s filing fee. In examining the Court’s agenda-setting function, existing studies have identified certain case characteristics, called “cue characteristics,” that increase the likelihood that the Supreme Court will select a petition for review. Those studies, however, have generally limited their analysis to paid petitions to the exclusion of those petitions filed by indigent litigants, the IFP petitions; even those studies that have included IFP cases in their analysis have failed to compare the Court’s agenda-setting process across the two dockets. Analysis of a sample of paid and unpaid petitions disposed of during the 1976 through 1985 Terms of the Court reveals that IFP petitions are disproportionately criminal and prisoner civil rights cases, are less likely to present most cue characteristics, and are more likely to be filed pro se. Moreover, certain issues – specifically minority rights, family law, and access to welfare benefits issues – are disproportionately represented on the IFP docket. Multivariate analysis of the Court’s selection of paid and unpaid petitions indicates that IFP cases are less likely to be accepted for review even when analysis controls for the presence or absence of previously identified cue characteristics. Moreover, the effects of cue characteristics vary between the paid and unpaid dockets, with the case characteristics having stronger effects in the context of the docket on which they are less prevalent. The findings suggest that cue characteristics do provide information to the Court during the agenda-setting process and are not merely correlates of some underlying quality of certworthiness. In addition, they suggest that the cases on the IFP docket are at a disadvantage during the certiorari process, and that disadvantage may have implications for the Court’s attention to certain classes of legal issues.
Lawrence Baum (Advisor)
175 p.
Political Science, General
Supreme Court; Certiorari; in forma pauperis; IFP; agenda-setting; cue theory

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Watson, W. L. (2004). The U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of petitions in Forma Pauperis [Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1092422764

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Watson, Wendy. The U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of petitions in Forma Pauperis. 2004. Ohio State University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1092422764.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Watson, Wendy. "The U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of petitions in Forma Pauperis." Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 2004. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1092422764

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

osu1092422764
3,784
© 2004, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by The Ohio State University and OhioLINK.
Release 3.2.12