The Radiating Effects of Courts' in K. Boyum and L. Mather (eds.), Empirical Theories about Courts New York: Longmans (1983) pp. 117-42.
Abstract
The flow of cases into the courts has figured prominently in many recent discussions. Fear that courts may be overwhelmed by swollen case loads (made up in part of matters better handled elsewhere) (see, e.g., the papers from the Pound Conference, 1976) is accompanied by distress at disputants' readiness to resort to the judicial process (e.g., Rosenberg. 1972- Barton 1975). On the other hand, there is concern to provide access" to groups and interests that have found it difficult to obtain a judicial heating (see Cappelletti and Garth. 1978). Notwithstanding their sharp differences about which cases should be in the courts, both sets of cntics share a focus on the centripetal movement of cases into the courts and a tendency to define the problem as one of matching cases and forums. Courts should get the number and kind of cases they can handle; cases should find appropriate forums in which they can be resolved. In this chapter I propose to look through the other end of the telescope. Instead of the centripetal movement of cases into courts, I want to look at the flow of influence outward from courts to the wider world of disputing and regulating. I shall argue that understanding the courts and their work requires that wc assess this centrifugal flow of influence. I argue further that such influence cannot be ascertained by attending only to the messages propounded by the courts. It depends on the resources and capacities of their various audiences and on the normative orderings indigenous to the various social locations where messages from the courts impinge.
