Explanations for the Vanishing Trial in the United States

Literature Cited

1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal 556 U.S. 662; 2009.)
2. Banks T. 2017. Civil trials: A firm illusion?. Fordham Law. Rev. 85:1969–86
   [Google Scholar]
3. Barnes J, Burke T 2015. How Policy Shapes Politics: Rights, Courts, Litigation, and the Struggle Over Injury Compensation New York: Oxford Univ. Press
4. Barnes J, Burke T. 2020. Untangling the concept of adversarial legalism. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 16:473–87
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly 550 U.S. 544; 2007.)
6. Berrey E, Nelson R, Nielsen LB. 2017. Rights on Trial: How Workplace Discrimination Law Perpetuates Inequality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
7. Bloom A. 2020. Injury and injustice. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 16:241–56
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bone R. 1999. The process of making process: court rulemaking, democratic legitimacy, and procedural efficacy. Georgetown Law Rev. 87:887–955
   [Google Scholar]
9. Burbank S. 1996. Procedure and power. J. Leg. Educ. 46:513–17
   [Google Scholar]
10. Burbank S. 2004. Vanishing trials and summary judgment in federal civil cases: Drifting towards Bethlehem or Gomorrah?. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3591–626
    [Google Scholar]
11. Burbank S, Farhang S. 2014. Litigation reform: an institutional approach. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 162:95–160
    [Google Scholar]
12. Burbank S, Farhang S. 2017. Rights and Retrenchment: The Counterrevolution Against Federal Litigation New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
13. Burke F. 2002. Lawyers, Lawsuits, and Legal Rights: The Battle Over Litigation in American Society Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
14. Burns R. 2013. Advocacy in the era of the vanishing trial. Kans. Law Rev. 61:893–904
    [Google Scholar]
15. Cent. Popul. Democr 2019. Unchecked Corporate Power: Forced Arbitration, the Enforcement Crisis, and How Workers Are Fighting Back Washington, DC: Cent. Popul. Democr. https://www.populardemocracy.org/Unchecked-Corporate-Power
16. Chayes A. 1976. The role of the judge in public law litigation. Harvard Law Rev 89:71281–316
    [Google Scholar]
17. Chemerinsky E. 2010. The Conservative Assault Against the Constitution New York: Simon & Schuster
18. Chemerinsky E. 2017. Closing the Courthouse Door: How Your Constitutional Rights Became Unenforceable New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
19. Chen MH. 2014. Governing by guidance: civil rights agencies and the emergence of language rights. Harvard Civ. Rights Civ. Lib. Law Rev. 49:291–342
    [Google Scholar]
20. Clark T. 2010. The Limits of Judicial Independence New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
21. Colvin AJS. 2018. The growing use of mandatory arbitration Rep., Econ. Policy Inst. Washington, DC: https://www.epi.org/publication/the-growing-use-of-mandatory-arbitration-access-to-the-courts-is-now-barred-for-more-than-60-million-american-workers/
22. Dodd L. 2015. The rights revolution in the age of Obama and Ferguson: policing, the rule of law, and the quest for accountability. Perspect. Politics 13:3657–79
    [Google Scholar]
23. Edelman L. 1990. Legal environments and organizational governance: the expansion of due process in the American workplace. Am. J. Sociol. 95:1401–40
    [Google Scholar]
24. Edelman L. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: organizational mediation of civil rights law. Am. J. Sociol. 97:1531–76
    [Google Scholar]
25. Eisenberg T, Lanvers C. 2009. What is the settlement rate and why should we care?. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 6:1111–46
    [Google Scholar]
26. Engel D. 2016. The Myth of the Litigious Society: Why We Don't Sue Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
27. Engel SM. 2011. American Politicians Confront the Court: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
28. Engstrom N. 2018. The diminished trial. Fordham Law Rev 86:2131–47
    [Google Scholar]
29. Epp C. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
30. Epp C. 2009. Making Rights Real: Activists, Bureaucrats, and the Creation of the Legalistic State Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
31. Estlund C. 2018. The black hole of mandatory arbitration. N.C. Law Rev. 96:679–710
    [Google Scholar]
32. Farhang S. 2010. The Litigation State: Public Regulation and Private Lawsuits in the U.S. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
33. Feeley M, Rubin E 1998. Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America's Prisons New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
34. Friedman L. 2004. The day before trials vanished. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3698–703
    [Google Scholar]
35. Frymer P. 2003. Acting when elected officials won't: federal courts and civil rights enforcement in US labor unions. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 97:483–99
    [Google Scholar]
36. Frymer P. 2008. Black and Blue: African Americans, the Labor Movement, and the Decline of the Democratic Party Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
37. Galanter M. 1974. Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:195–160
    [Google Scholar]
38. Galanter M. 2004. The vanishing trial: an examination of trials and related matters in federal and state courts. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3459–570
    [Google Scholar]
39. Galanter M, Cahill M. 1994.. “ Most cases settle”: judicial promotion and regulation of settlements. Stanford Law Rev. 46:1339–91
    [Google Scholar]
40. Galanter M, Frozena A. 2014. A grin without a cat: the continuing decline and displacement of trials in American courts. Daedalus 143:3115–28
    [Google Scholar]
41. Gardner P. 2018. Moving litigants to enforce public goods: evidence from employment, housing, and voting discrimination policy. The Rights Revolution Revisited: Institutional Perspectives on the Private Enforcement of Civil Rights in the U.S. L Dodd 70–99 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
42. Giles M. 2005. Opting out of liability: the near-total demise of the modern class action. Mich. Law Rev. 104:373–430
    [Google Scholar]
43. Giles M. 2014. Operation arbitration: privatizing medical malpractice claims. Theor. Inq. Law 15:671–96
    [Google Scholar]
44. Gillman H. 2002. How political parties can use the courts to advance their agendas: federal courts in the United States, 1875–1891. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 96:511–24
    [Google Scholar]
45. Graber M. 2008. The countermajoritarian difficulty: from courts to congress to constitutional order. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 4:361–84
    [Google Scholar]
46. Gross J. 2015. Justice Scalia's hat trick and the Supreme Court's flawed understanding of twenty-first century arbitration. Brooklyn Law Rev. 81:1111–48
    [Google Scholar]
47. Hacker J, Pierson P. 2011. Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer—and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class New York: Simon & Schuster
    [Google Scholar]
48. Haltom W, McCann M. 2004. Distorting the Law: Tort Reform, Mass Media, and the Social Production of Legal Knowledge Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
49. Hollis-Brusky A. 2015. Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution New York: Oxford Univ. Press
50. Horton D, Chandrasekher A. 2015. After the revolution: an empirical study of consumer arbitration. Georgetown Law J 104:57–124
    [Google Scholar]
51. Kagan R. 2019. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law Cambridge MA: Harvard Univ. Press. , 2nd ed..
52. Keck T. 2010. The Most Activist Supreme Court in History: The Road to Modern Judicial Conservatism Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
53. Kessler A. 2015. Arbitration and Americanization: the paternalism of progressive procedural reform. Yale Law J 124:2973–80
    [Google Scholar]
54. Kirkland A. 2016. Vaccine Court: The Law and Politics of Injury New York: NYU Press
55. Lahav A. 2017. In Praise of Litigation New York: Oxford Univ. Press
56. Lahav A, Siegelman P. 2019. The curious incident of the falling win rate. Univ. Calif. Davis Law Rev. 53:1371–427
    [Google Scholar]
57. Langbein J. 2012. The disappearance of civil trial in the United States. Yale Law J. 122:3522–72
    [Google Scholar]
58. Marcus R. 2014.. “ Looking backward” to 1938. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 162:71691–730
    [Google Scholar]
59. McCann M. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
60. Melnick RS. 2018. The Transformation of Title IX: Regulating Gender Equality in Education Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press
61. Mulroy Q. 2018. Approaches to enforcing the rights revolution: private civil rights litigation and the American bureaucracy. The Rights Revolution Revisited: Institutional Perspectives on the Private Enforcement of Civil Rights in the U.S. L Dodd 27–45 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
62. Noll D. 2017. Regulating arbitration. Univ. Calif. Law Rev. 105:985–1054
    [Google Scholar]
63. Pollis A. 2017. Busting up the pretrial industry. Fordham Law Rev 85:2097–117
    [Google Scholar]
64. Ratner M. 2017. Restraining lawyers: from ‘cases’ to ‘tasks.’. Fordham Law Rev 85:2151–73
    [Google Scholar]
65. Refo P. 2004. The vanishing trial: introduction. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3v–vii
    [Google Scholar]
66. Reinert A. 2014. The burdens of pleading. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 162:71767–92
    [Google Scholar]
67. Resnik J. 1982. Managerial judges. Harvard Law Rev. 96:374–448
    [Google Scholar]
68. Resnik J. 1997. Changing practices, changing rules: judicial and congressional rulemaking on civil juries, civil justice, and civil judging. Ala. Law Rev. 49:133–219
    [Google Scholar]
69. Resnik J. 2004. Migrating, morphing, and vanishing: the empirical and normative puzzles of declining trial rates. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3783–841
    [Google Scholar]
70. Resnik J. 2015. Diffusing disputes: the public in the private of arbitration, the private in courts, and the erasure of rights. Yale Law J 124:2804–939
    [Google Scholar]
71. Rosenberg G. 2008. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press. , 2nd ed..
72. Schlanger M. 2006. What we know, and what we should know, about American trial trends. J. Disput. Resol. 1:35–50
    [Google Scholar]
73. Siegel A. 2006. The court against courts: hostility to litigation as an organizing theme in the Rehnquist Court's jurisprudence. Tex. Law Rev. 84:1097–202
    [Google Scholar]
74. Silverstein G. 2009. Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves, and Kills Politics New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
75. Skrentny J. 2002. The Minority Rights Revolution Cambridge, MA: Belknap
76. Southworth A. 2008. Lawyers of the Right: Professionalizing the Conservative Coalition Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
77. Staszak S. 2015. No Day in Court: Access to Justice and the Politics of Judicial Retrenchment New York: Oxford Univ. Press
78. Staszak S. 2018. The administrative role of the chief justice: law, politics, and procedure in the Roberts Court era. Laws 7:15
    [Google Scholar]
79. Staszak S. 2020. Privatizing employment law: the expansion of mandatory arbitration in the workplace. Stud. Am. Political Dev. 34:239–68
    [Google Scholar]
80. Stipanowich T. 2004. ADR and the ‘vanishing trial:’ the growth and impact of ‘alternative dispute resolution. .’ J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3843–912
    [Google Scholar]
81. Stone K. 2013. Procedure, substance, and power: collective litigation and arbitration under the labor law. UCLA Law Rev. Discourse 61:136–38
    [Google Scholar]
82. Subrin S. 1987. How equity conquered common law: the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in historical perspective. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 135:909–1002
    [Google Scholar]
83. Subrin S, Main T. 2014. The fourth era of American civil procedure. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 162:1856–95
    [Google Scholar]
84. Szalai I. 2013. Outsourcing Justice: The Rise of Modern Arbitration Laws in America Durham, NC: Carolina Acad:.
85. Szalai I. 2019. The prevalence of consumer arbitration agreements by America's top companies. UC Davis Law Rev. Online 52:233–59
    [Google Scholar]
86. Teles S. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
87. Tushnet M. 2006. The Supreme Court and the national political order: collaboration and confrontation. The Supreme Court and American Political Development R Kahn, K Kersch 117–37 Lawrence: Univ. Kans. Press
    [Google Scholar]
88. Weinstein J. 1989.. After fifty years of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Are the barriers to justice being raised?. Univ. Pa. Law Rev. 137:1901–23
    [Google Scholar]
89. Whittington K. 2007. Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
90. Yeazell S. 2004. Getting what we asked for, getting what we paid for, and not liking what we got: the vanishing trial. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 1:3943–72
    [Google Scholar]