Constitutional Precedent of Amicus Briefs
This addresses a problem for legal scholars and practitioners by revealing how interest groups can influence constitutional precedent, though it is incremental as it builds on existing research about amicus briefs.
The study investigated whether language from interest groups' amicus briefs becomes legal precedent when cited in U.S. Supreme Court opinions, finding seven instances where this occurred, establishing binding constitutional case law.
We investigate shared language between U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions and interest groups' corresponding amicus briefs. Specifically, we evaluate whether language that originated in an amicus brief acquired legal precedent status by being cited in the Court's opinion. Using plagiarism detection software, automated querying of a large legal database, and manual analysis, we establish seven instances where interest group amici were able to formulate constitutional case law, setting binding legal precedent. We discuss several such instances for their implications in the Supreme Court's creation of case law.