From Textbook Pluralism to Modern

Hyperpluralism
By Charles M. Cameron, Cody Gray, Jonathan P.
Kastellec, and Jee-Kwang Park
By Antonia Adams and Kayra Rice
Research Question
How has interest group participation in the Supreme Court nomination process
changed over time? (Changing roles)
Core Definitions Pluralism: In a
democratic society,
there needs to be
access points for
people to get their
points known.

Textbook Pluralism: dominated by labor unions, abortion rights, core civil rights
groups, and groups affiliated with the old right.

Modern Hyperpluralism: public interest/citizen groups, and identity groups.

Documented changes in the following
● Levels of mobilization against a nominee
● Types and identities of interest groups ● Negative spaces= more
that mobilize
liberal nominees
● Size and composition of liberal and
conversative ecologies of groups over time ● Positive spaces=
● Tactics employed by the groups conservative nominees
● Timing of Group participation during the ● Higher scores= more
nomination process
● Predictors of overall group mobilization extreme nominees
levels
● Ideological extremity vs quality
What is the role of interest groups?
Lobbying by groups (liberal and conservative) influenced senatorial voting on these
nominees. There is direct lobbying of senators.
Data and Analysis
Analysis composed of coding articles in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times
covering Supreme Court nominations from 1930 - 2017.

Identified each story that discussed a nominee, coding for stories, groups, and
noted when an interest group was mentioned in the story.

?
First, they analyzed levels of
mobilization by noting the
number of groups mentioned by
the newspapers as participating
in the confirmation process.
Second, they calculated the
number of nominations in
which they participated,
understanding that the
composition of groups would
change over time, too.
Participants
Prominent classes
● They change in mobilization and increases often. of groups: identity
○ Repeat players groups,
○ Liberal vs conservative
occupational
● Most frequent participants: American Bar
Association, AFL-CIO federation of unions, and groups, and public
Liberty Lobby interest (citizen)
● Liberal groups and prominent groups: NAACP, groups
National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), Groups in
People for the American Way, AFL-CIO federation opposition vs
of unions, and National Organization on Women. Groups in support
● Characterize interest groups with different
typologies and organize by advantages and
difficulties
Third, they characterize interest
groups systematically, looking at
categories that divide the interest
group based on policies they are
interested in.

They looked at the most active

groups (labor, civil rights, and
abortion).
Also categorized by other categories:
● Corporations/Businesses
● State/Local Groups
● Occupational Groups
● Identity Groups
● Public Interest/Citizen Groups
● A Residual Category (Other)
Tactics and Timing
● Inside advocacy- face to face contact and first base communication with
legislators
● Outside advocacy- strategy to add fear to politicians’ faults on policy-making by
speaking to the press or the direct public
○ Strategies: Grassroot campaigns, advertising, and campaigning
○ Common lobbying tactics: sending letters to Congress state of oaths before Judiciary Committee

Shift in mobilization from Opposition to nominees who

waiting for hearings to are opinionated distant.
immediate mobilization

Nominations were to manage Legal qualifications revolve

campaigns. around scandals and corruption
in the media.
This is how tactics changed
in interest groups over time.
The y-axes depict the amount
of mobilization, in counts and
percentage.
 So, What
Predicts
Mobilization?
Three Trends Revealed
1. There is a shift from inside lobbying to outside lobbying.
2. There is an increase in the prevalence of grassroots lobbying tactics. (more
outside)
3. Groups have shifted toward immediate mobilization rather than waiting for
hearings to commence. (to get their voices heard)
Question and Answer
Why is Modern Hyperpluralism Why are these new elite groups How is pluralism
making this shift? using grassroots lobbying? switching?

● Large shifts in ● Because the groups are ● Mobilization has

confirmation politics - engaging in become more frequent,
focused on it as the opportunistic it involves larger
main venue to lobby mobilization. number of groups, and
Congress and spread ● The ideology of the liberal groups are now
the group’s message. nominee is what drives dominating the
● Nominations are seen the mobilization. mobilizers.
as a campaign.
Implications

Nominee Hyperpluralism has made the judicial process more rigid, calling for

Selection a more “painstaking, systematic, and considered” process.

Contention in There are now “hotly contested, polarized votes.” Interest

the Senate group participation correlates with contentious votes.

A Polarized Interest groups alter presidential agendas, which leads to a

Court polarized Congress, and polarized nominees.

Extremes rarely dominate for long, but hyperpluralism

Constitutional can lead to deeply a deeply polarized government.
Crisis???
Conclusion
Interest group participation
has changed over time by
there being a focus from
“formal” interest, such as
Judiciary Committee
testimonies to “informal”
interest, such as mobilizing
public opinion at a grassroots
level.