ABSTRACT Objectives This article examines the work of state courts of last resort in domestic violence cases. Specifically, it presents an analysis of all state supreme court decision‐making in cases dealing with domestic violence from 1965 to 2015. Methods The study uses logistic regression to model the impact of shifting American mainstream legal thought on the outcome of a domestic violence issue. Results The results of this analysis show that through their decisions these important state‐level institutions were collectively very active in providing greater protections to female survivors of domestic violence. The research also shows that a female domestic violence survivor has a higher probability of success before the state supreme court when: the domestic violence alleged in the case is life threatening, a protection order is involved, she is the appellee in the case, the state has a higher rate of rape, when state citizens are more liberal, and when justices affirm a state law targeting domestic violence. Conclusion Ultimately, the article shows that when it comes to domestic violence against women, state supreme court justices are primarily concerned with protecting survivors, and this result transcends political and social influences.
Barrick et al. (Fri,) studied this question.