Answering the call of the court : how justices and litigants set the Supreme Court agenda /

The US has undergone a "judicialization of politics" in which the Supreme Court serves as a primary agent in setting policy. Empirical research has often focused principally upon Court decisions and the selection of cases for consideration. Baird (Univ.of Colorado) presents and documents a symbiotic relationship crucial to the Court's policy-making power, in which justices signal their interest in new areas of policy and litigants or other "policy entrepreneurs," drawing from these clues, seek to prepare "ideal cases." These are cases that raise questions justices want to consider, and may produce answers beneficial to litigant interests or goals. "Pushing the envelope," litigants aim for (at least) minimum winning coalitions that incorporate an ideological sector of the Court, co-opting moderates when necessary. Justices' proffered policy interests, the initiatives of litigants and policy entrepreneurs, the "percolating" insights and refinements of appellate judges, and the culminating case selection and decisional labors of the Court all take time. Baird's most valuable empirical contribution is documentation of typical policy-making cycles of four or five years. This volume merits inclusion in all good undergraduate and research collections. Summing Up: Recommended. Lower- and upper-division undergraduates through faculty. J. D. Gillespie College of Charleston