Freakanomics Blog Takes a Look at How Justice Kennedy Could Vote: On the New York Times' Freakanomics Blog Ian Ayers wondered whether prediction markets or super crunching of numeric data would better predict how Justice Kennedy would vote. Ayers compared Josh Blackman's SCOTUS fantasy league, a traditional "wisdom of the crowds" predictor, with a statistical algorithm developed by four professors. The comparison inspired Ayers to create his own Justice Kennedy Prediction Tool that allows users to plug in answers for six questions (such as "the ideological
direction of lower court decision") and receive predictions of whether
Kennedy will affirm or reverse the lower court opinion. Josh Blackmun used the predictor to see if Kennedy would vote to affirm the lower court in Maryland v. Shatzer (CJLF brief available here) and found that Kennedy would vote to affirm. Only 43% of FantasySCOTUS.net members agreed. For more on Justice Kennedy and his judicial philosophy check out Lyle Denniston's book review of Justice Kennedy's Jurisprudence: The Full and Necessary Meaning of Liberty by Frank J. Colucci.
Terrorist Attempt Demonstrates It's Time We Started "Getting Serious About Terrorism": Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's bombing attempt has inspired Volokh Conspiracy blogger David Bernstein to comment that "[e]ver since 9/11, I've had the feeling that the U.S.'s domestic counter-terrorism efforts, including the Patriot Act, various airport security measures, and the like, have not been especially serious." He believes "the U.S. could take some obvious counter-terror measures that don't even seem to have been seriously considered."
Saving the Tough Cases for Last: On How Appealing, Howard Bashman posts a link to Michael Doyle's McClatchy Newspapers article "Supreme Court has saved toughest cases for second half." Doyle writes that when the Court returns for oral arguments on January 11, 2010, it will have decided only four cases "none dealing with the cases for which the term is likely to be remembered." Left undecided are questions about whether the government violates the First Amendment when it bans corporations from spending their own money on political campaigns, and whether states violate the Second Amendment when they ban gun possession. He writes that as these issues are decided, we are sure to learn more about the Supreme Court itself. For example, will Justice Stevens retire in 2010? And, how will Justice Sotomayor embrace her role as the newest Supreme Court Justice?
Terrorist Attempt Demonstrates It's Time We Started "Getting Serious About Terrorism": Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's bombing attempt has inspired Volokh Conspiracy blogger David Bernstein to comment that "[e]ver since 9/11, I've had the feeling that the U.S.'s domestic counter-terrorism efforts, including the Patriot Act, various airport security measures, and the like, have not been especially serious." He believes "the U.S. could take some obvious counter-terror measures that don't even seem to have been seriously considered."
Saving the Tough Cases for Last: On How Appealing, Howard Bashman posts a link to Michael Doyle's McClatchy Newspapers article "Supreme Court has saved toughest cases for second half." Doyle writes that when the Court returns for oral arguments on January 11, 2010, it will have decided only four cases "none dealing with the cases for which the term is likely to be remembered." Left undecided are questions about whether the government violates the First Amendment when it bans corporations from spending their own money on political campaigns, and whether states violate the Second Amendment when they ban gun possession. He writes that as these issues are decided, we are sure to learn more about the Supreme Court itself. For example, will Justice Stevens retire in 2010? And, how will Justice Sotomayor embrace her role as the newest Supreme Court Justice?
Leave a comment