 |
Mapping the Policies of the U.S. Supreme Court
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
1
M
APPING THE
P
OLICIES OF THE
U.S.
S
UPREME
C
OURT
:
D
ATA
,
O
PINIONS
,
AND
C
ONSTITUTIONAL
L
AW
Abstract
Scholars of the U.S. Supreme Court read and analyze the opinions of the justices. Based
on those readings, these observers attempt to offer a variety of characterizations regarding the meaning of the Court=s policies, the relationship of a ruling to prior opinions, and the general state of the law. To what degree might political methodology offer more systematic leverage on these issues? Employing a recent innovation in content analysis, we examine a sample of the Court=s decisions on several different constitutional issues. Specifically, we treat the words within the Court=s opinions as data to be quantified, and we attempt to extract their relative policy positions. Our evidence suggests that the ideological placements of those policies can, in some cases, be readily estimated. We speculate about the possible applications and limits of this form of content analysis as it relates to judicial opinions.
Introduction
Judicial opinions are one of the most important resources for scholars of law and courts.
Traditionally, these written rulings have constituted the foundation for critical assessments of legal
policy. They provide the evidentiary basis for most qualitative appraisals of judicial decision
making. Essays that evaluate the meaning and consistency of various rulings within particular
areas of the law are a staple of legal scholarship. For many students of the courts, however, the
written opinions of judges provide little more than the basis for deriving case outcomes, voting
alignments, and other variables of interest. By this means, quantitative information is generated by
reference to the relevant attributes of individual opinions.
The empirical accounts of judicial behavior possess a high degree of systematic rigor and
offer a great deal of insight into how judges make decisions. Among other things, this brand of
research sorts out the relative impact of personal preferences, legal factors, institutional constraints,
and external political pressures on the decisions judges makes. Whatever their virtues, however,
|
| |
| |
|
|
1
M
APPING THE
P
OLICIES OF THE
U.S.
S
UPREME
C
OURT
:
D
ATA
,
O
PINIONS
,
AND
C
ONSTITUTIONAL
L
AW
Abstract
Scholars of the U.S. Supreme Court read and analyze the opinions of the justices. Based
on those readings, these observers attempt to offer a variety of characterizations regarding the
meaning of the Court=s policies, the relationship of a ruling to prior opinions, and the general state
of the law. To what degree might political methodology offer more systematic leverage on these
issues? Employing a recent innovation in content analysis, we examine a sample of the Court=s
decisions on several different constitutional issues. Specifically, we treat the words within the
Court=s opinions as data to be quantified, and we attempt to extract their relative policy positions.
Our evidence suggests that the ideological placements of those policies can, in some cases, be
readily estimated. We speculate about the possible applications and limits of this form of content
analysis as it relates to judicial opinions.
Introduction
Judicial opinions are one of the most important resources for scholars of law and courts.
Traditionally, these written rulings have constituted the foundation for critical assessments of legal
policy. They provide the evidentiary basis for most qualitative appraisals of judicial decision
making. Essays that evaluate the meaning and consistency of various rulings within particular
areas of the law are a staple of legal scholarship. For many students of the courts, however, the
written opinions of judges provide little more than the basis for deriving case outcomes, voting
alignments, and other variables of interest. By this means, quantitative information is generated by
reference to the relevant attributes of individual opinions.
The empirical accounts of judicial behavior possess a high degree of systematic rigor and
offer a great deal of insight into how judges make decisions. Among other things, this brand of
research sorts out the relative impact of personal preferences, legal factors, institutional constraints,
and external political pressures on the decisions judges makes. Whatever their virtues, however,
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
