THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION DISCUSSED IS STATED AS FOLLOWS: GIVEN THE EXISTENCE OF (THEORETICALLY) DETERMINATIVE PRECEDENTS FOR ALL JUDGES, WHAT FACTORS ACCOUNT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH OR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THESE DECISIONS IN THE DECISION OF SIMILAR OR RELATED CASES? THREE ANSWERS TO THIS QUESTION ARE CONSIDERED: THE JUDICIAL BACKGROUNDS, NEUSTADTIAN, AND STATE IMPACT HYPOTHESES. THE JUDICIAL BACKGROUNDS HYPOTHESIS, WHICH ATTEMPTS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE INCIDENCE ON NONCOMPLIANT BEHAVIOR BOTH WITHIN COURTS AND AMONG STATES, SEEKS THE BASIS OF SUCH BEHAVIOR PRIMARILY IN THE ATTITUDES OF INDIVIDUAL JUDGES (INTERPOLATED FROM THEIR BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS) AND IN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STATE POLITICAL SYSTEMS IN WHICH THEY OPERATE. THE NEUSTADTIAN HYPOTHESIS SEEKS THE BASIS OF DIFFERENT LEVELS OF COMPLIANCE IN THE CHARACTER OF SUPREME COURT COMMUNICATIONS. THE STATE IMPACT SHPOTHESIS SEEKS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE PHENOMENON WITHIN AND AMONG STATES ON THE BASIS OF THE EFFECT THAT NONCOMPLIANCE WOULD HAVE ON STATE POLICY AND PRACTICES WITHIN THE STATE. THE STUDY FOCUSES ON THE COMPLIANCE PATTERNS OF FORTY-EIGHT STATE SUPREME COURTS WITH U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS DEALING WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION FROM 1947, WHEN THE COURT FIRST ANNOUNCED THE APPLICABILITY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT PROVISION TO STATE LEGISLATION, UNTIL 1973. SPECIFIC CASES ARE DISCUSSED. AN APPENDIX LISTS SOURCE MATERIALS USED IN TESTING THE NEUSTADTIAN HYPOTHESIS. A BIBLIOGRAPHY AND INDEX ARE PROVIDED.