Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:03:10.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Lawyers: The Structure of a National Network

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Anthony Paik ,
John P. Heinz  and
Ann Southworth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Some research on lawyers active in politics has found that the ties among them create networks in which a center or core of influential actors is surrounded by more peripheral participants. Other studies, however, found more segmented networks, sometimes lacking central players. This research examines the structure and determinants of political ties among forty-seven elite lawyers who served organizations prominent in fourteen national policy issues in 2004–05. The analysis finds a network structure that resembles a rough circle with Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other. Lawyers affiliated with organizations representing a broad constellation of interests are closer to the center of the network, while those working for specialized or narrow causes tend to be located in the periphery. Ties are more dense among conservatives than among liberals. Lawyers who work as organizational leaders or managers are more likely to be near the center than are litigators. Central actors contribute larger amounts to election campaigns. The organized bar, especially the American Bar Association, appears to provide links between liberals and conservatives in one segment of the network.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , Fall 2011 , pp. 892 - 918
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2011 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Bearman, Peter. 1997. Generalized Exchange. American Journal of Sociology 102:1383–415.Google Scholar
Bearman, Peter S., Moody, James, and Stovel, Katherine. 2004. Chains of Affection: The Structure of Adolescent Romantic and Sexual Networks. American Journal of Sociology 110:33–91.Google Scholar
Bonacich, Phillip. 1987. Power and Centrality: A Family of Measures. American Journal of Sociology 92:1170–82.Google Scholar
Domhoff, G. William. 1974. The Bohemian Grove and Other Retreats. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Domhoff, G. William. 1983. Who Rules America Now? A View for the '80s. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Edsall, Thomas B., and Milbank, Dana. 2005. The Right's Moment, Years in the Making. Washington Post, July 3, A1.Google Scholar
Federalist Society Web site. 2010. About Us. http://www.fed‐soc.org/aboutus/ (accessed April 25, 2011).Google Scholar
Freeman, Linton. 1979. Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarifications. Social Networks 1:125–39.Google Scholar
Friedkin, Noah E. 1991. Theoretical Foundations for Centrality Measures. American Journal of Sociology 96:1478–504.Google Scholar
Hanneman, Robert A., and Riddle, Mark. 2005. Introduction to Social Network Methods. Riverside: University of California, Riverside. http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Heinz, John P., Paik, Anthony, and Southworth, Ann. 2003. Lawyers for Conservative Causes: Clients, Ideology, and Social Distance. Law & Society Review 37:5–50.Google Scholar
Hill, The. 2007. The New Sheriffs in Town. The Hill, April 25, 24–26.Google Scholar
Hogg, Michael A. 1987. Social Identity and Group Cohesiveness. In Rediscovering the Social Group, ed. Turner, John C., Hogg, Michael A., Oakes, Penelope J., Reicher, Stephen D., and Wetherell, Margaret S., 89–116. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, David D. 2004. Club of the Most Powerful Gathers in Strictest Privacy. New York Times, August 28, A10.Google Scholar
Knoke, David. 1990. Political Networks: The Structural Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
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, 274–94. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Knoke, David, and Yang, Song. 2008. Social Network Analysis, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Laumann, Edward O., and Heinz, John P., Nelson, Robert L., and Salisbury, Robert H. 1985. Washington Lawyers and Others: The Structure of Washington Representation. Stanford Law Review 37:465–502.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
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., 18–34. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.Google Scholar
Levine, John M., and Moreland, Richard L. 1990. Progress in Small Group Research. Annual Review of Psychology 41:585–634.Google Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1922 1984. Argonauts of the Western Pacific. Reprint, Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
McGuire, Kevin T. 1993. The Supreme Court Bar: Legal Elites in the Washington Community. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
Miller, Charles E., and Komorita, Samuel S. 1986. Coalition Formation in Organizations. In Research on Negotiation in Organizations, ed. Lewicki, Roy J., Sheppard, Blair H., and Bazerman, Max H., 117–37. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Mills, C. Wright. 1956. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Gwen. 1979. The Structure of a National Elite Network. American Sociological Review 44:673–92.Google Scholar
National Journal. 2007. Leading Democratic Lobbyists. March 31, 32.Google Scholar
Nordlund, Carl. 2007. Identifying Regular Blocks in Valued Networks: A Heuristic Applied to the St. Marks Carbon Flow Data, and International Trade in Cereal Products. Social Networks 29:59–69.Google Scholar
Paik, Anthony, Southworth, Ann, and Heinz, John P. 2007. Lawyers of the Right: Networks and Organization. Law & Social Inquiry 32:883–917.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Southworth, Ann. 2008. Lawyers of the Right: Professionalizing the Conservative Coalition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Southworth, Ann, Paik, Anthony, and Heinz, John P. 2011. “Lawyers in National Policymaking.” In The Paradox of Professionalism: Lawyers and the Possibility of Justice, ed. Cummings, Scott. 220–42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Teles, Steven. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Useem, Michael. 1984. The Inner Circle: Large Corporations and the Rise of Business Political Activity in the U.S. and U.K. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wasserman, Stanley, and Faust, Katherine. 1994. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).Google Scholar
Kelo v. New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005).Google Scholar