LEGAL ARGUMENT, ISSUE FRAMING, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW ON THE SUPREME COURT

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorMcIntosh, Wayneen_US
dc.contributor.authorHensley, Jonathanen_US
dc.contributor.departmentGovernment and Politicsen_US
dc.contributor.publisherDigital Repository at the University of Marylanden_US
dc.contributor.publisherUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md.)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-26T05:45:58Z
dc.date.available2015-06-26T05:45:58Z
dc.date.issued2015en_US
dc.description.abstractAbstract Title of Dissertation: LEGAL ARGUMENT, ISSUE FRAMING, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW ON THE SUPREME COURT Jonathan B. Hensley, Doctor of Philosophy, 2015 Dissertation Directed By: Dr. Wayne McIntosh Department of Government and Politics Supreme Court advocates seek to influence the Supreme Court through the arguments made in briefs filed with the Court. This dissertation examines the extent to which language used in attorneys' briefs is adopted by the Supreme Court, and whether the arguments made by attorneys affect the content and outcome of Court decisions. I focus on the Court's campaign finance jurisprudence, as the focus on a particular area of law allows the tracing of language related to similar issues over time. In Chapter Two, I demonstrate that the Court's campaign finance decisions can be divided into four eras that are distinguishable by the Court's relative deference or skepticism toward legislative determinations regarding campaign finance regulation. Chapter Three examines instances in which justices have changed their minds on important issues and searches for evidence that arguments in briefs influenced these changes, but finds that there is little evidence that these changes can be directly attributed to arguments found in briefs. Chapter Four examines legal argument through issue framing, analyzing the issue frames employed in both court opinions and attorney's briefs. I conclude that the four eras of campaign finance law can also be distinguished by differences in issue framing. I further conclude that advocates can affect the way the Court views an issue by adding new frames at the Supreme Court level that were not present in the lower courts, especially in the transitional cases that mark the beginning of a new era.en_US
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.13016/M2JH0S
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/16677
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledPolitical Scienceen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledLawen_US
dc.titleLEGAL ARGUMENT, ISSUE FRAMING, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW ON THE SUPREME COURTen_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hensley_umd_0117E_16175.pdf
Size:
2.01 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

UMD Theses and Dissertations
Government & Politics Theses and Dissertations