Ranking the Politics of Supreme Court Justices

Four of the five most conservative justices since 1937 are on the bench today

May 12, 2008 RSS Feed Print
Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.

Just how conservative is the Supreme Court, anyway? It's a question that has dogged constitutional scholars for years, as they've tried to parse the opaque language and muddled writings of judges moving through the confirmation process. Today's court, headed by John Roberts with seven justices appointed by Republican presidents, is generally considered more conservative than the Supreme Court of the 1950s, for example, when Earl Warren oversaw its unanimous decision in Brown v. Board of Education. But it's hard to compare the current court—and today's justices—with, say, the Burger court of the 1970s, which, with six Republican-appointed justices, decided Roe v. Wade.

John McCain, for one, doesn't seem to want to take any chances. Last week, he joined a long line of Republican presidential candidates who have pushed for a more conservative court when he promised to make Samuel Alito and John Roberts his "models" for judicial appointments.

But how conservative would a McCain presidency make the court—and how conservative is it already? The answers to these questions may be found in a new paper by Richard Posner, a judge who sits on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and William Landes, a law professor at the University of Chicago, that is now making its way through the academic community. In "Rational Judicial Behavior: A Statistical Study," Posner and Landes use a database that includes the political background and voting records of the past 70 years of Supreme Court justices—who appointed each justice and how the justices decided every case—to come up with a ranking, from most conservative to least conservative, of the 43 justices who have served on the court since 1937.

Their conclusion: Four of the five most conservative justices to serve on the Supreme Court since Franklin Roosevelt, including Roberts and Alito, are currently sitting on the bench today. Justice Anthony Kennedy, another current Republican appointee, is ranked No. 10. (The table has a full list.) Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, the two current justices nominated by Democratic presidents, are among the 15 "least conservative" justices of the past 70 years. Thurgood Marshall, who became the first black Supreme Court justice when he was appointed in 1967, has the most liberal voting record on the list. Clarence Thomas, the second black justice, who was appointed to the court in 1991, is ranked the most conservative.

NUMBER OF CONSERVATIVE VOTES ON U.S. SUPREME COURT, 1937-2006

10 "Most Conservative" Justices

Justice Name Percentage
Conservative
Votes
Thomas .822
Rehnquist .815
Scalia .757
Roberts .753
Alito .740
Burger .735
O'Connor .680
Powell .677
Whittaker .673
Kennedy .647

10 "Least Conservative" Justices

Justice Name Percentage
Conservative
Votes
Marshall .211
Douglas .213
Murphy .241
Rutledge .247
Goldberg .248
Brennan .265
Black .283
Warren .308
Ginsburg .312
Cardozo .333

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These findings may not come as a surprise to political scientists, who have devised a range of techniques over the years for calculating judicial nominees' political ideologies, often based on their records before joining the Supreme Court. But Posner and Landes have taken their research a step further, examining the actual voting records of justices while they were sitting on the bench. To do this, they've relied on a database created by Harold Spaeth, a political scientist at Michigan State University, which codes each vote made on the Supreme Court between 1937 and 2006 as either "liberal," "conservative," "mixed," or "both." If a justice votes in favor of a defendant on a criminal procedure case, that vote is considered "liberal." If the justice votes against the plaintiff in a civil rights case, the vote is considered "conservative."

Tags:
politics,
Supreme Court,
democratic party,
John McCain,
republican party

Reader Comments Read all comments (15)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

If a justice votes in favor of a defendant on a criminal procedure case, that vote is considered "liberal." If the justice votes against the plaintiff in a civil rights case, the vote is considered "conservative."

Uh isn't it possible the the evidence shows that the [alledged] criminal is right, or that the plaintiff is wrong and that, not the justices political leaning is the reason for their vote?

This is completely bogus study!

Sean Wisner of FL 9:39AM April 08, 2012

no mike of md. your solution of what methodology is not sound. It is biased by your personal political leaning. literally in your case. you are projecting your ideology on your own made up conclusion of that methodology.

If a justice votes in favor of a defendant on a criminal procedure case, that vote is considered 'liberal.' If the justice votes against the plaintiff in a civil rights case, the vote is considered 'conservative.'" Could be seen as voting against the criminal or voting for the business as in the civil case. Same way as the Anti Abortion mantle is given versus the Pro choice mantle of their opposition. That 'way' points out the negativity of the stance. It is what we also point out when we are pointing out something. So, you are pointing out your biases and I belive those are right/conservative leaning. Am I wrong?

theywors that of AL 10:24PM December 20, 2011

These empirical studies are garbage. "If a justice votes in favor of a defendant on a criminal procedure case, that vote is considered 'liberal.' If the justice votes against the plaintiff in a civil rights case, the vote is considered 'conservative.'"

Take just one counter-example: local bar-owner John Doe files suit against his municipal government, challenging a new ordinance that bans smoking in establishments with liquor licenses. He is the a "civil rights plaintiff." The "conservative" vote, according to this methodology, would uphold the ban, and thereby bolster the government's power to interfere with John Doe's business in the name of saving his customers from themselves. I suppose those in the "least conservative" list would vote to strike down the ordinance.

Posner, of all people, should know better than to lend legitimacy to such superficial classifications by relying on them in academic discourse. I know he qualified his reliance on the data, but he shouldn't have even dignified that "methodology" with so much as a cursory acknowledgement.

Mike of MD 5:27PM June 02, 2011

Photo Galleries

Ring of Fire Eclipse

A rare solar eclipse created a "ring of fire" effect.

advertisement

Latest Video