Although thousands of petitions seeking review by the Supreme Court are filed each year, the justices only accept about 150 or fewer for plenary review, with perhaps a few hundred more disposed of summarily. Because of this low acceptance rate scholars have long thought that the justices must use some strategy or process to reduce their workload to manageable levels. Although the examination of agenda setting on the Supreme Court is of continuing interest to judicial scholars, previous studies have usually focused only on cert petitions, specific issues, particular terms, or sampling for their data collection. A more comprehensive examination of the cases filed before the Supreme Court will provide a clearer picture of how the justices set their agenda.
Drawing from an ongoing database project this study examines all cases filed before the Burger Court (1969 to 1985 Terms) on its appellate docket. The specific question involves the extent to which the Court takes cases to reverse them on ideological grounds. The results strongly suggest that the Burger Court had an ideological approach to both accepting cases for review and for disposing of them on the merits. This proved to be particularly true for cases from federal courts as well as cases coming before the Court on petitions for writs of certiorari.