.md .pdf

repository open issue

Contents

Attitudinal Model Case Study

Write an intro. Facts, text,

Methodology

To build a model that takes into account the subjective attitudes of the Supreme Court Justices. I use the Washington University Law Database (Spaeth, Epstein, et al. 2017) that takes into account the individual decisions of each justice in order to determine their ideological value across time. I then test these values against the facts, including attitudinal objects, and attitudinal situations, of Masterpiece Cake LTD. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018)

Ideological Score by Justice

To determine a justice’s ideological score I test their votes across time to determine whether they vote conservatively or liberally. A simple mean value between one and two is then generated. The closer to one a justice votes the more conservative. Alternatively, the closer to two the value, the more liberal. The results for the individual justices are included in the chart below.

Table 1 Ideological Score by Justice Figure 1.0

Justice	Mean	N	Std. Deviation	Variance
AMKennedy	1.42	2668	0.493	0.243
CThomas	1.32	2179	0.468	0.219
RBGinsburg	1.6	1964	0.491	0.241
SGBreyer	1.56	1848	0.496	0.246
JGRoberts	1.42	913	0.493	0.243
SAAlito	1.36	874	0.481	0.232
SSotomayor	1.62	600	0.487	0.237
EKagan	1.59	486	0.492	0.242
NMGorsuch	1.18	17	0.393	0.154
Total	1.47	11549	0.499	0.249

Ideological Score by Justice First Ammendment

Similarly, I derive ideological values according to voting patterns relating to first amendment cases. The results are printed in the following chart.

Table 2 Ideological Score by Justice by First Ammendment Figure 1.1

Justice	issue area of case (coarse)	Mean	N	Std. Deviation	Variance
AMKennedy	First Amendment	1.47	167	0.5	0.25
CThomas	First Amendment	1.33	127	0.472	0.223
RBGinsburg	First Amendment	1.68	112	0.469	0.22
SGBreyer	First Amendment	1.55	108	0.5	0.25
JGRoberts	First Amendment	1.51	47	0.505	0.255
SAAlito	First Amendment	1.42	43	0.499	0.249
SSotomayor	First Amendment	1.67	33	0.479	0.229
EKagan	First Amendment	1.67	27	0.48	0.231
NMGorsuch	First Amendment	2	1	.	.
Total	First Amendment	1.51	665	0.5	0.25

Ideological Score by Justice by Individual Issue Area

Finally, ideological scores are derived by issue area. For the purpose of this discussion this is equivalent to an evaluation of the individual attitude-situations as they relate to the facts of the case. The results are below:

Table 3 Ideological Score by Justice by Issue Area Figure 1.2

Justice	issue area of case (coarse)	Issue Area Of Case (Fine)	Mean	N	Std. Deviation	Variance
AMKennedy	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.71	14	0.469	0.22
		Establishment Of Religion	1.23	13	0.439	0.192
		Total	1.48	27	0.509	0.259
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.71	14	0.469	0.22
		Establishment Of Religion	1.23	13	0.439	0.192
		Total	1.48	27	0.509	0.259
CThomas	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.91	11	0.302	0.091
		Establishment Of Religion	1.1	10	0.316	0.1
		Total	1.52	21	0.512	0.262
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.91	11	0.302	0.091
		Establishment Of Religion	1.1	10	0.316	0.1
		Total	1.52	21	0.512	0.262
RBGinsburg	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.56	9	0.527	0.278
		Establishment Of Religion	2	9	0	0
		Total	1.78	18	0.428	0.183
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.56	9	0.527	0.278
		Establishment Of Religion	2	9	0	0
		Total	1.78	18	0.428	0.183
SGBreyer	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	9	0.441	0.194
		Establishment Of Religion	1.67	9	0.5	0.25
		Total	1.72	18	0.461	0.212
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	9	0.441	0.194
		Establishment Of Religion	1.67	9	0.5	0.25
		Total	1.72	18	0.461	0.212
JGRoberts	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	7	0	0
		Establishment Of Religion	1	2	0	0
		Total	1.78	9	0.441	0.194
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	7	0	0
		Establishment Of Religion	1	2	0	0
		Total	1.78	9	0.441	0.194
SAAlito	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	6	0	0
		Establishment Of Religion	1	2	0	0
		Total	1.75	8	0.463	0.214
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	6	0	0
		Establishment Of Religion	1	2	0	0
		Total	1.75	8	0.463	0.214
SSotomayor	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.5	6	0.548	0.3
		Establishment Of Religion	2	2	0	0
		Total	1.63	8	0.518	0.268
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.5	6	0.548	0.3
		Establishment Of Religion	2	2	0	0
		Total	1.63	8	0.518	0.268
EKagan	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.8	5	0.447	0.2
		Establishment Of Religion	2	1	.	.
		Total	1.83	6	0.408	0.167
NMGorsuch	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	1	.	.
		Total	2	1	.	.
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	1	.	.
		Total	2	1	.	.
Total	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	68	0.418	0.174
		Establishment Of Religion	1.46	48	0.504	0.254
		Total	1.65	116	0.48	0.231
	Total	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	68	0.418	0.174
		Establishment Of Religion	1.46	48	0.504	0.254
		Total	1.65	116	0.48	0.231

Expected Results

In an attempt to replicate the results of Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Chicago Civil Rights Commission (2018) I will simply consult the three ideological values above. If a justice scores below a 1.5 in any area, then they will be expected to vote conservatively. Conversely if a score above 1.5 is observed the justice is expected to vote liberally.

In context, A liberal vote will found in favor of the Mr. Charlie Craig and his partner, Mr. Dave Mullins. The following variables describe liberal voting preferences as they relate to the case. Pro-civil liberties or civil rights, pro-neutrality in establishment clause cases, pro-underdog, anti-owner, anti-business, pro-government, pro-exercise of judicial action, and pro-judicial activism. A conservative vote is in favor of Mr. Philips, the Colorado baker. Conservatism in context is described as opposite the above liberal values.

Justice Vote According to General Ideological Score

Table 4 Justice Vote by General Ideological Score Figure 4

Justice	Score	Vote
AMKennedy	1.42	Cons.
CThomas	1.32	Cons.
RBGinsburg	1.6	Lib.
SGBreyer	1.56	Lib.
JGRoberts	1.42	Cons.
SAAlito	1.36	Cons.
SSotomayor	1.62	Lib.
EKagan	1.59	Lib.
NMGorsuch	1.18	Cons.
Total	1.47	Cons.

Justice Votes by First Amendment

Table 5 Justice Vote by Amendment Figure 5

Justice	issue area of case (coarse)	Score	Vote
AMKennedy	First Amendment	1.47	Cons.
CThomas	First Amendment	1.33	Cons.
RBGinsburg	First Amendment	1.68	Lib.
SGBreyer	First Amendment	1.55	Lib.
JGRoberts	First Amendment	1.51	Lib.
SAAlito	First Amendment	1.42	Cons.
SSotomayor	First Amendment	1.67	Lib.
EKagan	First Amendment	1.67	Lib.
NMGorsuch	First Amendment	2	Cons.
Total	First Amendment	1.51	Lib.
	Total	1.51	Lib.

Justice Votes by Issue Area

Table 6 Justice Vote by Issue Area Figure 6

Justice Identification Number	Issue Area Of Case (Coarse)	Issue Area Of Case (Fine)	Score	Vote
Amkennedy	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.71	Lib.
		Establishment Of Religion	1.23	Cons.
		Total	1.48	Cons.
Cthomas	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.91	Lib.
		Establishment Of Religion	1.1	Cons.
		Total	1.52	Lib
Rbginsburg	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.56	Lib
		Establishment Of Religion	2	Lib
		Total	1.78	Lib
Sgbreyer	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	Lib
		Establishment Of Religion	1.67	Lib
		Total	1.72	Lib
Jgroberts	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	Lib
		Establishment Of Religion	1	Cons.
		Total	1.78	Lib.
Saalito	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	Lib.
		Establishment Of Religion	1	Cons.
		Total	1.75	Lib.
Ssotomayor	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.5	Lib/Con
		Establishment Of Religion	2	Lib.
		Total	1.63	Lib.
Ekagan	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.8	Lib.
		Establishment Of Religion	2	Lib.
		Total	1.83	Lib.
Nmgorsuch	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	2	Lib.
		Total	2	Lib.
Total	First Amendment	Free Exercise Of Religion	1.78	Lib.
		Establishment Of Religion	1.46	Cons.
		Total	1.65	Lib.

Prediction Summary

The general ideological value scores predict a 5-4 split along the usual lines (figure 5 include a ref). The conservative majority coalition consists of Justices, Kennedy, Thomas, Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch. The liberal minority is of Justices Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

The ideological scores by the first amendment issue area, predicts a very different outcome. For instance, a 7-2 liberal majority is expected. Kennedy, is expected to vote with the conservative coalition, along with Gorsuch. The Liberal majority consists of, Thomas, Ginsberg, Breyer, Roberts, Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

Testing again for individual issue areas, the results seem spurious. When controlling for just the establishment clause, there is a 5-4 majority conservative coalition comprised of Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Gorsuch. The minority coalition consists of Justices, Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan. However, when controlling for Free Exercise, a 9-0 liberal majority is the expected outcome.

previous

Legal Model Case Study

next

Findings