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.
Two weeks ago, we began our detailed analysis of the data on oral arguments in civil and criminal cases between 2008 and 2016. This week and next, we’ll be looking at Justice Rita B. Garman’s patterns in oral argument, starting with civil cases.
Our data includes 102 cases in which Justice Garman voted with a
Today we continue our Justice-by-Justice review of the questioning patterns for criminal, quasi-criminal and disciplinary cases decided during 2015, checking our conclusions against our work in the summer and fall with civil cases decided since 2008. Today, we review the data for Justice Freeman, Chief Justice Garman and Justice Thomas, working our way from left