"Such inferior courts...": Compliance by circuits with jurisprudential regimes

Through its rulings, the U.S. Supreme Court makes clear what the Constitution means and how best to interpret congressional statutes. But, because Supreme Court rulings do not implement themselves, the Court is dependent on compliance by lower courts to effectuate its policies. Using the concept of jurisprudential regimes developed by Richards and Kritzer in 2002 and specifically the Establishment Clause jurisprudential regime they identified in 2003, we evaluate the extent to which the U.S. Courts of Appeals faithfully implement the Supreme Court's policy in this area of law. We find that decision making by court of appeals panels is indeed structured by the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudential regime, even when taking into account the policy preferences of court of appeals judges. Furthermore we find that this attentiveness to legal factors is not a function of circuit court judges' fear of reversal.