Predicting Votes from Oral Arguments
Predicting Votes from Oral Arguments
Two recent studies have concluded that Supreme Court decisions can be anticipated by the behavior of justices during the oral arguments, specifically that in the vast majority of cases (85%–90%) the eventual losing side was asked more questions by the justices. But the conclusions of these studies were based on a limited number of cases (10 to 14). This chapter evaluates the claim by examining all the cases (70 to 80) in each of five terms and refining the definition of a “question.” The chapter finds that the side asked the most questions does lose more often (about 60% of the time), but not to the degree claimed in the earlier studies. The effect is much more salient in ideological cases than in nonideological ones.
Keywords: prediction of decisions, Devil’s advocate questioning, ideological cases, nonideological cases, more-questions-to-the-loser rule, Solicitor General
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
