4930919195_fba81d8a96_z

Yesterday, we analyzed whether we can infer Justice Thomas’ votes and whether or not he’s writing an opinion based upon the pattern of his questions at oral arguments in civil cases.  Today, we ask a different question – when Justice Thomas asks the first question in a civil case, does it mean he’s writing the opinion?

When Justice Thomas is voting with the majority in an affirmance, there’s a 56.64% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellants, and a 34.51% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellees.  When he’s not writing an opinion, there’s a 53.76% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellants, and a 34.41% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellees.

When Justice Thomas is in the majority of a reversal, there’s a 44.72% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellants and a 47.83% chance for appellees.  Writing the majority opinion has a significant impact; when he’s in the majority, there’s 53.85% chance he’ll ask the first question of appellants and a 69.23% that he’ll ask the first question of appellees.  When Justice Thomas isn’t writing an opinion, there’s a 43.28% chance that he’ll ask the first question, both for appellants and appellees.

Table 487

When Justice Thomas was in the minority of an affirmance, there was a 60% chance that he’d ask the first question of appellants, and a one-third chance that he’d ask the first question of appellees.  When Justice Thomas was not writing a dissent while voting with the minority of an affirmance, there was a 50% chance that he’d ask the first question of appellants, and a 25% chance that he’d ask the first question of appellees.

When Justice Thomas voted in the minority of a reversal, there was a 50% chance that he’d ask the first question of appellants.  He never asked the first question of appellees under such circumstances.  The data was the same when Justice Thomas wrote a dissent, and when he didn’t write – there was a 50% chance that Justice Thomas would ask the first question of appellants, and a 0% chance for the appellees.

Table 488

Join us back here next Tuesday as we turn our attention to Justice Thomas’ patterns in oral arguments in criminal cases.

Image courtesy of Flickr by VXLA (no changes).