Last week, we analyzed the pattern of Justice Kilbride’s questions in oral arguments in civil cases, asking whether it’s possible to infer who Justice Kilbride will vote for and whether or not he’s writing an opinion. This week, we do the same for the Court’s criminal cases between 2008 and 2016.
Overall, Justice Kilbride has
Yesterday, we asked whether we can infer anything about Justice Kilbride’s vote and whether he’s writing an opinion, based on the pattern of his questions in oral argument. Today, we ask a slightly different question – can we infer anything from whether or not Justice Kilbride asks the first question in a civil case?
Justice
Over the last two weeks, we’ve reviewed Justice Freeman’s question patterns in civil and criminal cases. This week, we’ll be reviewing Justice Kilbride’s patterns with his questioning in civil cases.
Justice Kilbride has heard oral argument in 127 cases where he voted with the majority in an affirmance. He wrote the majority opinion in eight
Yesterday, we showed that unlike many of his colleagues, Justice Freeman does not tend to ask the party he’s voting against more questions at oral argument – he averages more questions to the appellants in every scenario. Today, we ask whether we can infer that Justice Freeman is writing an opinion in cases where he
Last week, we looked at the pattern of Justice Freeman’s questioning in oral arguments in civil cases, analyzing whether he tends to ask more questions of the party he will ultimately vote against, and what impact writing an opinion has on questioning. This week, we take a look at Justice Freeman’s patterns in criminal cases.
Yesterday, we began analyzing Justice Freeman’s question patterns in civil cases. Today, we analyze whether it is more likely that Justice Freeman will ask the first question, depending on his vote and whether he’s writing an opinion.
Overall, when Justice Freeman is in the majority of an affirmance, there’s a 12.5% chance that Justice Freeman
Last week, we analyzed Justice Garman’s question patterns in criminal cases. This week, we address Justice Freeman’s question pattern in civil cases.
We begin with cases in which Justice Freeman has voted with the majority. When Justice Freeman votes with the majority, he more heavily questions the appellant by a wide margin. Justice Freeman averages
Yesterday, we showed how Justice Garman’s vote and whether she is writing an opinion impacts her question patterns in criminal cases. Today, we take the analysis the final step: what can we infer when Justice Garman asks the first question in a criminal case?
When Justice Garman is in the majority of an affirmance, she
Last week, we looked at the data from the past nine years’ oral arguments in civil cases, analyzing how Justice Garman’s vote, and whether or not she’s in the majority, impacts her question patterns. We also looked at whether it’s reasonable to infer that Justice Garman might be writing an opinion in cases where she’s
Yesterday, we showed that between 2008 and 2016, an unusually high level of questions from Justice Garman indicated that she was likely writing an opinion. We also demonstrated that when Justice Garman was in the minority, she averaged more questions to the party she would vote against rather than the party which would ultimately lose.