Replication data for: Explaining Executive Success in the U.S. Supreme Court

The solicitor general is widely believed to occupy a special status among the parties appearing in the U.S. Supreme Court. A broad array of theoretical advantages are thought to contribute to the federal government's influence, but scholars have no direct evidence of their impact. More importantly, virtually all existing research has failed to measure directly the influence of those advantages across other parties, as well. Estimating a series of probit models of executive success in the Court under both Democratic and Republican administrations, I test the impact of one such advantage, litigation experience, measured for all parties across all cases. The results suggest that, notwithstanding the conventional wisdom, there is nothing distinctive about the solicitor general's influence. Thus, existing explanations regarding the solicitor general's institutional prestige appear to overstate the importance of the executive's role in the Court.普遍认为，美国副检察长（Solicitor General）在出席美国最高法院的各方当事人中拥有特殊地位。学界普遍认为，一系列理论层面的优势助力联邦政府在最高法院的影响力，但学者们尚未获得这些优势实际影响的直接证据。更为关键的是，几乎所有现有研究也未能直接衡量这些优势对其他当事方的影响力。本研究通过构建民主党与共和党政府任期内，联邦行政部门在最高法院胜诉情况的一系列概率单位模型（probit model），针对所有案件中的所有当事方量化了其中一项优势——诉讼经验的影响，并对其进行检验。研究结果显示，与传统认知相悖，美国副检察长的影响力并无特殊之处。因此，现有关于美国副检察长制度声望的相关解释，似乎高估了行政部门在最高法院中的作用重要性。