ON BEHALF OF THE CONDEMNED? THE IMPACT OF THE NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE FUND ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT DECISION MAKING IN THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

THERE IS A RICH HISTORY OF SCHOLARSHIP DEMONSTRATING THAT INTEREST GROUPS MAY INFLUENCE JUDICIAL POLICY MAKING, BUT THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SYSTEMATIC TEST OF WHETHER A SINGLE GROUP HAS CONTRIBUTED TO CASE OUTCOMES OVER AN ENTIRE POLICY AREA WHILE CONTROLLING FOR OTHER ELEMENTS OF JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING. THIS STUDY ASSESSES THE NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND'S (LDF) CONTRIBUTION TO 217 CAPITAL PUNISHMENT CASES DECIDED IN THE U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS. IT FINDS THAT, WHEN CONSIDERED IN THE ENTIRE JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING CONTEXT, THE LDF HAS NOT BEEN A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR INFLUENCING CASE RESULTS. MOREOVER, AN INTERACTION MODEL SUGGESTS THAT THE LDF'S ABILITY TO AFFECT CASE OUTCOMES IS CONTROLLED LARGELY BY EXTRA-LEGAL FACTORS. FINALLY, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE LDF'S DECISION TO LITIGATE FOLLOWS A PATTERN BASED ON THIS JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING CONTEXT.