About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



16 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 237 (2008-2009)
An Empirical Analysis of Supreme Court Certiorari Petition Procedures: The Call for Response and the Call for the Views of the Solicitor General

handle is hein.journals/gmlr16 and id is 241 raw text is: 2009]

AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF SUPREME COURT
CERTIORARI PETITION PROCEDURES:
THE CALL FOR RESPONSE AND THE CALL FOR THE
VIEWS OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL
David C. Thompson and Melanie F. Wachtell
Introduction  .......................................................................................... 240
I.   Call for Response    (or  CFR) ............................................................ 245
A .  P rocess  .................................................................................... 246
1.  The  W  aiver Process ........................................................... 246
2.   The  CFR   Process ............................................................... 247
B. The Significance of a CFR ....................................................... 248
1.  The  Frequency    of CFRs   .................................................... 248
2. The Impact of a CFR on the Likelihood of a Certiorari
G rant .................................................................................. 2 50
3.   The Relevance of Time of Year ........................................ 252
C. The Significance of a Waiver .................................................. 253
1.  Frequency    of W  aiver ......................................................... 253
2.   The Implications of Waiving ............................................. 255
D .  The  United  States  as  a  Party  .................................................... 257
1.  Waiver Practice of the United States as Respondent ......... 257
2.   The Predictive Value of the Solicitor General's Waiver
of Response on Certiorari Denial ...................................... 258
3.   Calls   for   Response     from    the   United    States   as
R espondent ........................................................................ 260
4.   Calls for Response to Cert Petitions Filed by the United
S tates  ................................................................................. 2 6 1
E .  States  as  Parties ........................................................................ 261
1.  Waiver Practice of Individual States as Respondents ....... 261
2.   The Predictive Value of a State's Waiver of Response
on  C ertiorari D enial ........................................................... 263
3.   Calls for Response from Individual States as
R espondents   ...................................................................... 264
4.   Calls for Response to Cert Petitions Filed by Individual
S tates  ................................................................................. 2 6 5
F .  Private  L itigants ....................................................................... 265
1.  Waiver Practice of Private Litigants as Respondents ........ 265
2.   The Predictive Value of a Private Litigant's Waiver on
C ertiorari  D enial ................................................................ 267
3.   Calls for Response from Private Litigants as
R espondents   ...................................................................... 268