Last week, we looked at whether the level of disagreement on the Illinois Supreme Court affects the average number of questions at oral argument. Today, we begin our analysis of the central question addressed in most of the previous scholarship: does the losing side tend to get the most questions?
For the entire period from
Yesterday, we addressed the data on average questions asked to each side by the Illinois Supreme Court in unanimous and non-unanimous cases. We concluded that there was no evidence that disagreement on the Court had a consistent effect in either direction on the total number of questions.
But of course, “non-unanimous” is an aggregate statistic,
Last week, we began our analysis of questioning patterns on the Court by addressing the most basic question of all: which side gets the most questions? Today, we address a related question: does it matter if there is disagreement on the Court?
Certain theories about the role of oral argument in appellate decision making would
Today, we begin our analysis of the questioning patterns in civil cases at the Illinois Supreme Court.
But first, a few ground rules to govern our inquiry. Data is always assigned to the year in which the case was decided, not the date of its argument. Therefore, the data for 2008 will always be incomplete,
Today, we begin the second phase of our empirical study of the Illinois Supreme Court’s civil decision making – a data analytic look at the Court’s oral arguments. For this addition to the Supreme Court database, we reviewed the videotapes on the Court’s website of all 233 oral arguments in civil cases from January 1,
Today we conclude our analysis of voting patterns over the past fifteen years’ worth of civil cases on the Illinois Supreme Court by considering the entire fifteen year period – which Justices voted with the majority most often when the Court was split? The data below encompasses the entire tenure on the Court for every
Last week, we began our study of the voting patterns on the Illinois Supreme Court between 2010 and 2014 by considering the agreement rates between the Justices in non-unanimous civil cases. Now we turn to a different aspect of the issue: the question of swing votes on the Court.
For most of the period, the
Yesterday, we addressed swing voter patterns at the Illinois Supreme Court between 2005 and 2009. Today, we turn to agreement rates between the Justices during the final five years of our study period, 2010 to 2014.
The Court’s unanimity rate between 2010 and today presents us with a bit of a conundrum. In 2010 and
Last week, we began our intensive look at the voting dynamics at the Illinois Supreme Court in civil cases between 2005 and 2009. Today, we assess the results of our study of agreement rates by turning to the issue of swing voters. How often was each Justice in the majority when the Court was divided?
Yesterday, we looked at the evidence of a centrist voting bloc at the Court between 2005 and 2009, consisting of Chief Justice Thomas and Justices Garman and Karmeier, frequently joined by Justice Fitzgerald. Today, we look at the agreement rates among the remainder of the Justices.
Justice Burke initially had quite high agreement rates with