percentages denote that the Roberts Court are more divided than its predecessors (Appendix Figure 1). Notwithstanding the aforementioned facts, many Supreme Court observers call the contemporary Court the Court,” because Justice Kennedy is often described as the “Kennedy median justice (Alfano 2009, Cole 2006). During the Court’s 2012-2013 Term, Justice Kennedy was in the majority in 5-4 cases more than any other justice at 87%. There were 23 cases decided 5-4 during that term. Kennedy was in the majority in 20 of them. In the 5-4 decisions, Kennedy sided with the conservative bloc 43% of the time and the liberal wing 26% of the time. Therefore, Kennedy was the swing vote 69% of the time in 5-4 decisions (Red State: The Supreme Court in Review, 7/1/2013). In this paper, I will analyze the ideological voting behavior of the justices’ on the Roberts Court to ascertain which exemplify moderate ideological direction. The question of judicial voting alignments has been an interesting and important issue in judicial politics (Hensley, Thomas, Christopher E. Smith, and Joyce A. Baugh 1997). To analyze judicial alignments, scholars often categorize the justices on the Court into voting blocs on the basis of ideological behavior (Jost 1995; Biskupic 1992).To comprehend such power, political scientists have studied the behavior of justices who pivot between two competing positions, as that tension may result in fluidity in individual votes (Hagle and Spaeth 1991; Maltzman and Wahlbeck 1996.) The position that the moderates hold at the ideological center may tend to “tip or swing” the Court one way or the other (Schmidt and Yalof 2004). Thus, in closely divided cases the votes cast by the moderate center justices determine the balance of power on the Court. The purposes of this article are to reveal the characteristics of moderate judicial behavior and to determine the conditions under which moderate decision-making occurred on the Roberts
percentages denote that the Roberts Court are more divided than its predecessors (Appendix Figure 1). Notwithstanding the aforementioned facts, many Supreme Court observers call the contemporary Court the “Kennedy Court,” because Justice Kennedy is often described as the median justice (Alfano 2009, Cole 2006). During the Court’s 2012-2013 Term, Justice Kennedy was in the majority in 5-4 cases more than any other justice at 87%. There were 23 cases decided 5-4 during that term. Kennedy was in the majority in 20 of them. In the 5-4 decisions, Kennedy sided with the conservative bloc 43% of the time and the liberal wing 26% of the time. Therefore, Kennedy was the swing vote 69% of the time in 5-4 decisions (Red State: The Supreme Court in Review, 7/1/2013). In this paper, I will analyze the ideological voting behavior of the justices’ on the Roberts Court to ascertain which exemplify moderate ideological direction. The question of judicial voting alignments has been an interesting and important issue in judicial politics (Hensley, Thomas, Christopher E. Smith, and Joyce A. Baugh 1997). To analyze judicial alignments, scholars often categorize the justices on the Court into voting blocs on the basis of ideological behavior (Jost 1995; Biskupic 1992).To comprehend such power, political scientists have studied the behavior of justices who pivot between two competing positions, as that tension may result in fluidity in individual votes (Hagle and Spaeth 1991; Maltzman and Wahlbeck 1996.) The position that the moderates hold at the ideological center may tend to “tip or swing” the Court one way or the other (Schmidt and Yalof 2004). Thus, in closely divided cases the votes cast by the moderate center justices determine the balance of power on the Court. The purposes of this article are to reveal the characteristics of moderate judicial behavior and to determine the conditions under which moderate decision-making occurred on the Roberts
ModerateBehaviorontheRobertsCourtbyPaulFoote.docx