Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Lawyers of the Right: Networks and Organization

  • Anthony Paik, Ann Southworth and John P. Heinz

Abstract

Lawyers for conservative and libertarian causes are active in organizing and mobilizing interest groups within the conservative coalition, and networks of relationships among those lawyers help to maintain and shape the coalition. Using data gathered in interviews with seventy-two such lawyers, this article analyzes characteristics of the lawyers and the structure of their networks. The findings suggest that the networks are divided into segments or blocks that are identified with particular constituencies, but that a distinct set of actors with extensive relationships serves to bridge the constituencies. Measures of centrality and brokerage confirm the structural importance of these actors in the network, and a search of references in news media confirms their prominence or prestige. This “core” set of actors occupies the “structural hole” in the network that separates the business constituency from religious conservatives. Libertarians, located near the core of the network, also occupy an intermediate position. Regression analysis of ties within the network suggests that the Federalist Society plays an important role in bringing the lawyers together.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Abramson, Jill. 1986. Right Place at the Right Time. American Lawyer June: 99100.
Alexander, C. Norman Jr. 1963. A Method for Processing Sociometric Data. Sociometry 26:268–69.
Baker, Frank B., and Hubert, Lawrence J. 1981. The Analysis of Social Interaction Data: A Nonparametric Technique. Sociological Methods and Research 9:339–61.
Becker, Howard S. 1963. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Bonacich, Phillip. 1987. Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures. American Journal of Sociology 92:1170–82.
Broder, David S. 2005. From Miers, Telling Words. Washington Post, October 6, A27.
Brown, Steven P. 2002. Trumping Religion: The New Christian Right, the Free Speech Clause, and the Courts. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
Burt, Ronald S. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Patterson, Samuel C. 1987. Political Friendship in the Legislature. The Journal of Politics 49:953–75.
Chaddock, Gail Russell. 2005. A Judicial Think Tank—or a Plot? Christian Science Monitor, August 4, A1.
Congressional Universe. 2000. Bethesda, MD: LexisNexis (division of Reed Elsevier).
DeParle, Jason. 2005. Debating the Subtle Sway of the Federalist Society. New York Times, August 1, A12.
Domhoff, G. William. 1983. Who Rules America Now? A View from the ’80s. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Dye, Thomas R. 1986. Who's Running America: The Conservative Years. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Eades, Peter. 1984. A Heuristic for Graph Drawing. Congressus Numerantium 42:149–60.
Epstein, Lee. 1985. Conservatives in Court. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.
Federalist Society. 2004. Our purpose. http://www.fed-soc.org/ourpurpose.htm (accessed May 24, 2004).
Fernandez, Roberto M., and Gould, Roger V. 1994. A Dilemma of State Power: Brokerage and Influence in the National Health Policy Domain. American Journal of Sociology 99:1455–91.
Fernandez, Roberto M., and McAdam, Doug. 1988. Social Networks and Social Movements: Multiorganizational Fields and Recruitment to Mississippi Freedom Summer. Sociological Forum 3:357–82.
Fletcher, Michael A. 2005. What the Federalist Society Stands For: Group Is Haven for Conservative Thought. Washington Post, July 29, A21.
Frank, Kenneth A., and Yasumoto, Jeffrey Y. 1998. Linking Action to Social Structure within a System: Social Capital within and between Subgroups. American Journal of Sociology 104:642–86.
Freeman, Linton. 1979. Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarifications. Social Networks 1:215–39.
Freeman, Linton. 2005. Graphic Techniques for Exploring Social Network Data. In Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis, ed. Carrington, Peter J., Scott, John, and Wasserman, Stanley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Friedkin, Noah E. 1991. Theoretical Foundations for Centrality Measures. American Journal of Sociology 96:1478–504.
Galaskiewicz, Joseph. 1979. Exchange Networks and Community Politics. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Goldthorpe, John H., and Keith, Hope. 1972. Occupational Grading and Occupation Prestige. In The Analysis of Social Mobility: Methods and Approaches, ed. Hope, Keith. London: Oxford University Press.
Gould, Roger V. 1989. Power and Social Structure in Community Elites. Social Forces 68:531–52.
Gould, Roger V., and Fernandez, Roberto. 1989. Structures of Mediation: A Formal Approach to Brokerage in Transaction Networks. Sociological Methodology 19:89126.
Hacker, Hans J. 2005. The Culture of Conservative Christian Litigation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Hatcher, Laura. 2005. Economic Libertarians, Property, and Institutions: Linking Activism, Ideas, and Identities among Property Rights Advocates. In The Worlds Cause Lawyers Make: Structure and Agency in Legal Practice, ed. Sarat, Austin and Scheingold, Stuart A. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Heinz, John P., and Laumann, Edward O. 1982. Chicago Lawyers: The Social Structure of the Bar. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Heinz, John P., Laumann, Edward O., Nelson, Robert L., and Salisbury, Robert H. 1993. The Hollow Core: Private Interests in National Policymaking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Heinz, John P., Nelson, Robert L., Sandefur, Rebecca L., and Laumann, Edward O. 2005. Urban Lawyers: The New Social Structure of the Bar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Heinz, John P., Paik, Anthony, and Southworth, Ann. 2003. Lawyers for Conservative Causes: Clients, Ideology, and Social Distance. Law and Society Review 37:550.
Hoover, Dennis R., and Den Dulk, Kevin R. 2004. Christian Conservatives Go to Court: Religion and Legal Mobilization in the United States and Canada. International Political Science Review 25:934.
Houck, Oliver. 1984. With Charity for All. Yale Law Journal 93:1415–563.
Kadushin, Charles. 1995. Friendship Among the French Financial Elite. American Sociological Review 60:202–21.
Kamada, Tomihisa, and Kawai, Satoru. 1991. A General Framework for Visualizing Abstract Objects and Relations. ACM Transaction on Graphics 10:129.
Kirkpatrick, David D. 2005a. Despite Recent Gains, Conservative Group Is Wary on Direction of Court. New York Times, November 11, A20.
Kirkpatrick, David D. 2005b. Ruling on Property Seizures Rallies Christian Groups. New York Times, July 11, A13.
Knoke, David. 1990. Political Networks: The Structural Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Knoke, David. 1993. Networks as Political Glue: Explaining Public Policy Making. In Sociology and the Public Agenda, ed. Wilson, William J. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Knoke, David. 1994. Networks of Elite Structure and Decision Making. In Advances in Social Network Analysis: Research in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, ed. Wasserman, Stanley and Galaskiewicz, Joseph. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Krackhardt, David. 1987. QAP Partialling as a Test of Spuriousness. Social Networks 9:171–86.
Krackhardt, David. 1988. Predicting with Networks: Nonparametric Multiple Regression Analysis of Dyadic Data. Social Networks 10:359–81.
Krishnan, Jayanth K., and Den Dulk, Kevin R. 2002. So Help Me God: A Comparative Study of Religious Interest Group Litigation. Georgia Journal of International Comparative Law 30:233–79.
Lasswell, Harold D. 1936. Politics: Who Gets What, When, and How. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Laumann, Edward O., Heinz, John P., Nelson, Robert L., and Salisbury, Robert H. 1985. Washington Lawyers and Others: The Structure of Washington Representation. Stanford Law Review 37:465502.
Laumann, Edward O., and Knoke, David. 1987. The Organizational State: A Perspective on National Energy and Health Domains. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Laumann, Edward O., Knoke, David, and Kim, Yong-Hak. 1985. An Organizational Approach to State Policy Formation: A Comparative Study of Energy and Health Domains. American Sociological Review 50:119.
Laumann, Edward O., and Marsden, Peter V. 1979. The Analysis of Oppositional Structures in Political Elites: Identifying Collective Actors. American Sociological Review 44:713–32.
Laumann, Edward O., Marsden, Peter V., and Galaskiewicz, Joseph. 1977. Community Influence Structures: Replication and Extension of a Network Approach. American Journal of Sociology 31:169–78.
Laumann, Edward O., Marsden, Peter V., and Prensky, David. 1989. The Boundary Specification Problem in Network Analysis. In Research Methods in Social Network Analysis, ed. Freeman, Linton C. and White, Douglas R. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.
Laumann, Edward O., and Pappi, Franz U. 1976. Networks of Collective Action: A Perspective on Community Influence Systems. New York: Academic Press.
Liasson, Mara. 2005. Miers Nomination Divides Conservatives. Morning Edition, October 21.
Marwell, Gerald, and Oliver, Pamela. 1993. Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McGuire, Kevin T. 1993. Lawyers and the U.S. Supreme Court: The Washington Community and Legal Elites. American Journal of Political Science 37:365–90.
Mills, C. Wright. 1956. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
Moody, James, McFarland, Daniel, and Bender-deMoll, Skye. 2005. Dynamic Network Visualization. American Journal of Sociology 110:1206–41.
Nielsen, Laura Beth, and Albiston, Catherine R. 2006. The Organization of Public Interest Practice. North Carolina Law Review 84:1591–621.
O'Connor, Karen, and Epstein, Lee. 1983. The Rise of Conservative Interest Group Litigation. Journal of Politics 45:479–89.
O'Connor, Karen, and Epstein, Lee. 1989. Public Interest Law Groups: Institutional Profiles. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Padgett, John F., and Ansell, Christopher K. 1993. Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. American Journal of Sociology 81:730–80.
Ponnuru, Remesh. 2005. Why Conservatives Are Divided. New York Times, October 17, A19.
RightGuide's Conservative Directory. 2000. http://www.rightguide.com/links-alpha.htm (accessed June 21, 2000).
Salisbury, Robert H. 1969. An Exchange Theory of Interest Groups. Midwest Journal of Political Science 13:132.
Salisbury, Robert H. 1984. Interest Representation: The Dominance of Institutions. American Political Science Review 78:6476.
Salisbury, Robert, Heinz, John P., Laumann, Edward O. and Nelson, Robert L. 1987. Who Works with Whom? Interest Group Alliances and Opposition. American Political Science Review 81:1217–34.
Savage, David G. 2005. The Nation; Engaged in a Very Civil War; The Federalist Society has Reshaped the Legal System Without Ever Going to Court. New York Times, November 11, A1.
Shapiro, Carl, and Varian, Hal R. 1998. Information Rules. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Shils, Edward. 1968. Deference. In Social Stratification, ed. Jackson, John A., 104–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, James A. 1991. The Idea Brokers: Think Tanks and the Rise of the New Policy Elite. New York: Free Press.
Southworth, Ann. 2005. Conservative Lawyers and the Contest Over the Meaning of “Public Interest Law.” UCLA Law Review 52:1223–78.
Useem, Michael. 1983. The Inner Circle: Large Corporations and Business Politics in the U.S. and the U.K. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wagner, Bridgett G., Hilboldt, John E., and Korsvall, Eric T. 2000. Policy Experts 2000: A Guide to Public Policy Experts and Organizations. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.
Washington Representatives. 2000. Washington, DC: Columbia Books.
Wasserman, Stanley, and Katherine, Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
White, Harrison C., Boorman, Scott A., and Breiger, Ronald L. 1976. Social Structure from Multiple Networks. I. Blockmodels of Roles and Positions. American Journal of Sociology 81:730–79.
Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

Lawyers of the Right: Networks and Organization

  • Anthony Paik, Ann Southworth and John P. Heinz

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed