{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012776831345826235, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.994897959183674, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Federal Agencies and the Supreme Court

This article examines differences in support among federal agencies appearing before the Supreme Court. The author reports that there are significant differences in levels of support, among the agencies, when we control for agency type and the directionality of the agency's decision over time. The findings of the analysis indicate that the Supreme Court is more likely to support agencies that are independent in nature and perform a quasi-judicial role in the bureaucracy. Although executive type agencies are supported to a high degree, they are significantly less likely to be supported when compared with independent agencies. Examining the success of agencies over time, the author also finds that the success of federal agencies is dependent on the directionality of the agency's decision and the ideology of the Court. The Warren Court was more likely to support an agency when its decision was liberal than when it was conservative, whereas the Burger Court responded in an opposite manner. The conclusion from this analysis is that the policy values of the Court have a significant impact even in the area of agency policy.