The Long and the Short of It: The Influence of Briefs on Outcomes in the Roberts Court


This Article considers the role of information, affected groups, and persuasion in the connection between justice votes and the content of briefs in the Roberts Court. Hazelton, Hinkle, and Spriggs shed new light on the previously observed finding that the side with the most briefs is more likely to win. The authors find that the true advantage lies in providing the Court with a greater amount of information overall, and that holding total information constant, a greater number of briefs is, surprisingly, a disadvantage.


Roberts Court, Supreme Court, Briefs, Influence, Success, Information, Groups, Persuasion



Morgan L.W. Hazelton (Assistant Professor, Saint Louis University Department of Political Science and School of Law)
Rachael K. Hinkle (Assistant Professor, University of Buffalo, SUNY)
James F. Spriggs (Sidney W. Souers Professor of Government and Chair of the Department of Political Science, Washington University in St. Louis)



Publication details



All rights reserved

File Checksums (MD5)

  • pdf: 5ed81260536494c9ae854da9f9e03584