SSRN Home Search and Download Papers Browse Abstract and Paper Submission Subscribe to Networks View Briefcase Top Papers Top Authors Top Institutions

 

Abstract

 


 


Download | Share | Email | Add to Briefcase | Buy Hard Copy

Judicial Epochs in Supreme Court History: Sifting Through the Fossil Record for Stitches in Time and Switches in Nine

Jim Chen
University of Louisville - Louis D. Brandeis School of Law



St. Louis University Law Journal, Vol. 47, p. 667, 2003
Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 06-41

Abstract:     
Professor Thomas Merrill has argued that Supreme Court Justices' propensity to engage in cooperative behavior may stem from the stability or volatility of the Court's personnel. When the Court's membership is in flux, he asserts, the Justices tend to behave like players in a one-shot or short-term game. Multiple coalitions flourish, but none dominates and all tend to hedge their doctrinal bets against imminent changes in the Court's personnel. By contrast, when the same nine Justices convene across multiple Terms, the Court tends to reflect the strategy of a repeat game. Dominant coalitions, few in number and stable in composition, feel much freer to fashion doctrinal innovations.

This article subjects Professor Merrill's cooperative behavior hypothesis to a variety of empirical tests. To determine whether long periods of stability in Supreme Court personnel correspond with bold doctrinal development, this article applies three separate tests of legal innovation: (1) the propensity of a Court to render influential decisions during particular Terms, (2) the influence of a Term's work as a whole based on subsequent citations, and (3) the number of overruling decisions rendered during any given Term. These admittedly imperfect tests provide little support for Professor Merrill's hypothesis. If anything, both citations and overrulings suggest that the arrival of new Justices tends to spur rather than retard doctrinal movement.

To the extent that stable membership does enhance the Supreme Court's marginal propensity to cut new doctrinal ground, that tendency apparently imparts less influence than other factors. A preliminary look at the historical record suggests that judicial behavior, like all other complex phenomena, depends on numerous variables whose interdependence eludes easy detection.

Keywords: Supreme Court, Justices, innovation, overruling, citations, empirical, influence, decisions, stability, volatility, Rehnquist,, Fuller

Accepted Paper Series

Date posted: August 31, 2006 ; Last revised: October 02, 2006

Suggested Citation

Chen, Jim,Judicial Epochs in Supreme Court History: Sifting Through the Fossil Record for Stitches in Time and Switches in Nine. St. Louis University Law Journal, Vol. 47, p. 667, 2003; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 06-41. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=927574


Export to: Export Citation What's this?

Contact Information

James Ming Chen (Contact Author)
University of Louisville - Louis D. Brandeis School of Law ( email )
Wilson W. Wyatt Hall
Louisville, KY 40292
United States
502-852-6879 (Phone)
502-852-0862 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 472
Downloads: 86
Download Rank: 61,964

© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use
This page was served by apollo1 in 0.125 seconds.