The first comprehensive empirical analysis of the emergency docket

When the Supreme Court acts on an application for an emergency ruling, the decision often arrives without warning. No oral arguments, no lengthy written opinions, just a brief order—sometimes issued in the middle of the night—that can halt an execution, block a voting law, or allow an immigration policy to proceed while lower courts sort out its legality. Has the Supreme Court’s approach to emergency applications changed over time? And if so, what does that mean for the implementation of the law in the United States?

Drawing on an examination of more than two thousand emergency applications made over twenty-five years, Taraleigh Davis documents and analyzes a striking procedural transformation from a streamlined to an elaborate deliberative process that has, until now, largely escaped scholarly attention. The stakes are enormous: The Court increasingly cites its own shadow docket decisions in both emergency applications and merits opinions. Meanwhile, these emergency rulings reshape immigration policy, determine election procedures and outcomes, and redefine constitutional rights.