title: Justice blocks and predictability of U.S. Supreme Court votes.
abstract: Successful attempts to predict judges' votes shed light into how legal decisions are made and, ultimately, into the behavior and evolution of the judiciary. Here, we investigate to what extent it is possible to make predictions of a justice's vote based on the other justices' votes in the same case. For our predictions, we use models and methods that have been developed to uncover hidden associations between actors in complex social networks. We show that these methods are more accurate at predicting justice's votes than forecasts made by legal experts and by algorithms that take into consideration the content of the cases. We argue that, within our framework, high predictability is a quantitative proxy for stable justice (and case) blocks, which probably reflect stable a priori attitudes toward the law. We find that U.S. Supreme Court justice votes are more predictable than one would expect from an ideal court composed of perfectly independent justices. Deviations from ideal behavior are most apparent in divided 5-4 decisions, where justice blocks seem to be most stable. Moreover, we find evidence that justice predictability decreased during the 50-year period spanning from the Warren Court to the Rehnquist Court, and that aggregate court predictability has been significantly lower during Democratic presidencies. More broadly, our results show that it is possible to use methods developed for the analysis of complex social networks to quantitatively investigate historical questions related to political decision-making.
authors.affiliation: Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. roger.guimera@urv.cat
authors.forename: Roger
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Guimerà
authors.forename: Marta
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sales-Pardo
mesh_terms: D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D012935:Social Justice; D035521:Supreme Court Decisions; D014481:United States
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Apr 26;108(17):6889-92
references.pmid: 21482790
references.citation: Science. 2009 Feb 13;323(5916):892-5
references.pmid: 19213908
references.citation: Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2007 Sep;76(3 Pt 2):036102
references.pmid: 17930301
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jun 24;100(13):7432-7
references.pmid: 12821777
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 29;106(52):22073-8
references.pmid: 20018705
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 May 17;102(20):7057-62
references.pmid: 15897470
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Aug 17;101(33):12085-90
references.pmid: 15297617
references.citation: Science. 2010 May 14;328(5980):876-8
references.pmid: 20466926
references.citation: Nature. 2008 Jul 3;454(7200):34-5
references.pmid: 18596791