Zotero Case Study

Lawyers, Landmarks & Constitutional Dialogue: The Due Process Revolution from Mapp to Furman 

‘Lawyers, Landmarks & Constitutional Dialogue’ explores the ability of legal advocates to influence the decisions of the United States Supreme Court through a close study of four landmark decisions from 1961-1972: Mapp v. Ohio (1961), Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), Miranda v. Arizona (1966), and Furman v. Georgia (1972). Through the use of a framework based on the idea of ‘constitutional dialogue’, the project argues that lawyers and their strategic decisions often play an important role in the Court’s decision-making process, and that this role is poorly understood by scholars of the Court. In particular, groups who argue as amicus curiae [friends of the Court], including the NAACP and ACLU, were able to exert considerable influence over the Court’s decisions. 

Detailed Project Description Research Methodology Steps to Reproducibility

image.png