U.S. Supreme Court courtroom in Washington, D.C. Credit: Carol M. Highsmith/Library of Congress via Wikimedia Commons
The New Jersey Law Journal Young Lawyers Advisory Board recently asserted in a commentary that “the [U.S. Supreme Court]’s decision making seems to have a focus on serving the conservative agenda, in lieu of honoring stare decisis” due to the partisanship surrounding the appointment process. In making this argument, they are asserting essentially that the majorities in Dobbs and the affirmative action cases acted in bad faith and abandoned their role as independent judges. This conclusion is both wholly unsupported and damaging to our legal system as a whole.
As an empirical matter, the court is not inordinately partisan. In the 2022-2023 term, the court decided 58 cases. Of those cases, only five were split six to three along ideological lines. Half of the opinions were unanimous. Even the justices did not vote on purely ideological lines. Chief Justice John Roberts more frequently voted with Justice Elena Kagan than with Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, or Clarence Thomas.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
