Show simple item record

All or Nothing: Explaining the Size of Supreme Court Majorities

dc.contributor.authorEdelman, Paul H.
dc.contributor.authorSherry, Suzanna
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-17T19:55:25Z
dc.date.available2014-06-17T19:55:25Z
dc.date.issued2000
dc.identifier.citation78 N.C. L. Rev. 1225 (2000)en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/6488
dc.descriptionpublished law reviewen_US
dc.description.abstractIn this Article, Professors Edelman and Sherry use a probabilistic model to explore the process of coalition formation on the United States Supreme Court. They identify coalition formation as a Markov process with absorbing states and examine voting patterns from twelve Court Terms. On the basis of their data, they conclude that Justices are reluctant to remain in small minorities. Surprisingly, however, they also find that a three-Justice minority coalition is less likely to suffer defections than a four-Justice minority coalition. This counterintuitive result suggests that while in general it is minority Justices rather than majority Justices who drive the process of coalition formation, five-Justice majorities may be particularly interested in attracting additional votes. The Article closes with suggestions for future research.en_US
dc.format.extent1 PDF (29 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherNorth Carolina Law Reviewen_US
dc.subject.lcshUnited States. Supreme Court -- Decision makingen_US
dc.subject.lcshUnited States. Supreme Court -- Opinionsen_US
dc.subject.lcshUnited States. Supreme Court -- Plurality decisionsen_US
dc.titleAll or Nothing: Explaining the Size of Supreme Court Majoritiesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record