Does Legal Doctrine Matter? Unpacking Law and Policy Preferences on the U.S. Supreme Court

Judicial scholars often struggle to disentangle the effects of law and policy preferences on U.S. Supreme Court decision making. We employ a new approach to measuring the effect—if any—of the law on justices’ decisions. We use positions taken on Supreme Court cases by members of Congress and presidents to identify policy components of voting. Doing so enables us to isolate the effects of three legal doctrines: adherence to precedent, judicial restraint, and a strict interpretation of the First Amendment’s protection of speech clause. We find considerable evidence that legal factors play an important role in Supreme Court decision making. We also find that the effect of legal factors varies across justices.

[1]  Kazuaki Iwata,et al.  Flow Control Strategy for Flexible Machining and Assembly System , 1992, PROLAMAT.

[2]  V. Baird.  The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited , 2004, The Journal of Politics.

[3]  David E. Klein,et al.  The Influence of Jurisprudential Considerations on Supreme Court Decisionmaking: A Study of Conflict Cases , 2006 .

[4]  R. Arnold.  The logic of congressional action , 1990 .

[5]  D. Forte.  Supreme Court Justices , 1973 .

[6]  H. Gillman,et al.  Supreme Court decision-making : new institutionalist approaches , 1999 .

[7]  Barry R. Weingast,et al.  A positive theory of statutory interpretation , 1992 .

[8]  Joshua D. Clinton,et al.  The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data , 2004, American Political Science Review.

[9]  Cornell W. Clayton,et al.  "The Supreme Court and Political Jurisprudence : New and Old Institutionalisms." , 1999 .

[10]  Edward Hirsch Levi,et al.  An Introduction to Legal Reasoning , 1950 .

[11]  P. Rosanvallon.  Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution , 2007 .

[12]  Keith E. Whittington.  Taking What They Give Us: Explaining the Court's Federalism Offensive , 2001 .

[13]  L. Baum.  What Judges Want: Judges' Goals and Judicial Behavior , 1994 .

[14]  Tony Mauro.  Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe , 2006 .

[15]  J. Segal,et al.  Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices , 1989 .

[16]  K. T. Poole,et al.  Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting , 1997 .

[17]  Timothy M. Hagle,et al.  Ideological Patterns in the Justices' Voting in the Burger Court's Business Cases , 1993, The Journal of Politics.

[18]  Lee Epstein,et al.  Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices Revisited , 1989, The Journal of Politics.

[19]  H. Wechsler.  Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law , 1959 .

[20]  Lee Epstein,et al.  The Norm of Stare Decisis , 1996 .

[21]  J. Segal,et al.  A Preference for Deference? The Supreme Court and Judicial Review , 2004 .

[22]  Daniel R. Pinello.  Gay Rights and American Law , 2003 .

[23]  J. Ferejohn,et al.  Norms and the Law: Judicial Independence in a Democracy: Institutionalizing Judicial Restraint , 2006 .

[24]  D. Polsby.  Buckley v. Valeo: The Special Nature of Political Speech , 1976, The Supreme Court Review.

[25]  Ronald Dworkin,et al.  Taking Rights Seriously. , 1978 .

[26]  Jeffrey A. Segal,et al.  The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of United States Supreme Court Justices , 1996 .

[27]  S. Breyer.  Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution , 2005 .

[28]  Stefanie A. Lindquist,et al.  Not the whole story: The impact of justices' values on supreme court decision making , 1996 .

[29]  J. Segal,et al.  Norms, Dragons, and Stare Decisis: A Response , 1996 .

[30]  John N. Drobak.  Norms and the law , 2006 .

[31]  Planned Parenthood v Casey. , 1993, JAMA.

[32]  M. Tushnet.  A Court Divided: The Rehnquist Court and the Future of Constitutional Law , 2005 .

[33]  James F. Spriggs,et al.  Designing Tests of the Supreme Court and the Separation of Powers , 2004 .

[34]  W. Greene,et al.  计量经济分析 = Econometric analysis , 2009 .

[35]  J. Segal.  Separation-of-Powers Games in the Positive Theory of Congress and Courts , 1997, American Political Science Review.

[36]  L. Baum.  The puzzle of judicial behavior , 1997 .

[37]  Alan R. White,et al.  Taking Rights Seriously. , 1977 .

[38]  H. Kritzer,et al.  Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making , 2002, American Political Science Review.

[39]  Jeffrey A. Segal,et al.  Supreme Court Decision Making , 1975 .

[40]  Barry D. Friedman,et al.  Pulling Punches: Congressional Constraints on the Supreme Court's Constitutional Rulings, 1987-2000 , 2006 .

[41]  Ethan Bueno de Mesquita,et al.  Informative Precedent and Intrajudicial Communication , 2002, American Political Science Review.

[42]  Michael A. Bailey.  Comparable Preference Estimates across Time and Institutions for the Court, Congress, and Presidency , 2007 .

[43]  Andrew D. Martin,et al.  Ideological Drift Among Supreme Court Justices: Who, When, and How Important? , 2007 .

[44]  J. Rosen.  The Most Democratic Branch: How the Courts Serve America , 2006 .

[45]  Tracey E. George,et al.  On the Nature of Supreme Court Decision Making , 1992, American Political Science Review.

[46]  Stefanie A. Lindquist,et al.  Judicial Review by the Burger and Rehnquist Courts , 2007 .

[47]  Adam Meirowitz,et al.  Agenda Constrained Legislator Ideal Points and the Spatial Voting Model , 2001, Political Analysis.

[48]  Andrew D. Martin,et al.  Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999 , 2002, Political Analysis.

[49]  James F. Spriggs,et al.  The Politics of Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court , 2006 .

[50]  John Ferejohn,et al.  Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy , 1990 .

[51]  Gerald N. Rosenberg.  The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model , 1994 .

[52]  Barry D. Friedman.  Taking Law Seriously , 2006, Perspectives on Politics.

[53]  J. Segal,et al.  Do Political Preferences Change? A Longitudinal Study of U.S. Supreme Court Justices , 1998, The Journal of Politics.

[54]  S. Brenner,et al.  Retesting Segal and Spaeth's Stare Decisis Model , 1996 .

[55]  Maurie Caitlin Kelly,et al.  Government Printing Office expands database access , 1995 .

[56]  John Paul Stevens.  Learning on the Job , 2006 .

[57]  J. Segal,et al.  An Original Look at Originalism , 2002 .