IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/empleg/v10y2013i1p1-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Diversity on the Supreme Court with Biodiversity Statistics

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin H. Barton
  • Emily Moran

Abstract

This article aims to accomplish two goals. The first is to introduce some of the more common statistical measures of biodiversity to the empirical study of law. The second is to measure the diversity of background on the current Supreme Court using diversity indices commonly used in ecology. We treat the Supreme Court as if it is an ecosystem, and life experiences and traits as if they are different species, and ask whether diversity in seven categories (race/ethnicity, religion, professional background, geographic background, economic background, education, and political party) has grown or shrunk over time. We then combine these categories to create a single overall diversity measure. The results demonstrate that although the current Supreme Court is more diverse overall than the long‐term historical average, there has been a recent downward trend in overall diversity, driven by decreases in diversity of educational background, geographic background, and, to a lesser extent, religious diversity. However, diversity of professional background and of childhood economic background has remained high in recent years, and racial diversity has increased greatly.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin H. Barton & Emily Moran, 2013. "Measuring Diversity on the Supreme Court with Biodiversity Statistics," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:10:y:2013:i:1:p:1-34
    DOI: 10.1111/jels.12000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12000
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jels.12000?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Attaran, Mohsen, 1986. "Industrial Diversity and Economic Performance in U.S. Areas," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 44-54, July.
    2. Goldman, Sheldon, 1975. "Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals Revisited," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(2), pages 491-506, June.
    3. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    4. Tate, C. Neal, 1981. "Personal Attribute Models of the Voting Behavior of U.S. Supreme Court Justices: Liberalism in Civil Liberties and Economics Decisions, 1946–1978," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(2), pages 355-367, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Denise M. Keele & Robert W. Malmsheimer & Donald W. Floyd & Lianjun Zhang, 2009. "An Analysis of Ideological Effects in Published Versus Unpublished Judicial Opinions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 213-239, March.
    2. Allen Huang & Kai Wai Hui & Reeyarn Zhiyang Li, 2019. "Federal Judge Ideology: A New Measure of Ex Ante Litigation Risk," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 431-489, May.
    3. Paul H. Edelman & David E. Klein & Stefanie A. Lindquist, 2012. "Consensus, Disorder, and Ideology on the Supreme Court," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 129-148, March.
    4. Xiaosi Zhang & Jizhong Shao, 2024. "Evaluation of the Suitability of Street Vending Planning in Urban Public Space in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, April.
    5. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    6. Ashley Poston & Brian E. Whitacre, 2014. "How Specialized is “Too” Specialized? Outmigration and Industry Diversification in Nonmetropolitan Counties across America," Journal of Economic Insight, Missouri Valley Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 37-63.
    7. Steven Deller & Philip Watson, 2016. "Spatial variations in the relationship between economic diversity and stability," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 520-525, May.
    8. Florian Noseleit, 2020. "The Role of Entry and Market Selection for the Dynamics of Regional Diversity and Specialization," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(1), pages 76-94, July.
    9. Paresh Kumar Narayan & Russell Smyth, 2007. "What Explains Dissent on the High Court of Australia? An Empirical Assessment Using a Cointegration and Error Correction Approach," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 401-425, July.
    10. Rorie Spill Solberg & Stefanie A. Lindquist, 2006. "Activism, Ideology, and Federalism: Judicial Behavior in Constitutional Challenges Before the Rehnquist Court, 1986–2000," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), pages 237-261, July.
    11. Xiaohong Yu & Zhaoyang Sun, 2022. "The company they keep: When and why Chinese judges engage in collegiality," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 936-1002, December.
    12. Steven Brams & D. Kilgour, 2013. "Kingmakers and leaders in coalition formation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(1), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2021. "Issue attention on international courts: Evidence from the European Court of Justice," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 793-815, October.
    14. Keren Weinshall‐Margel, 2011. "Attitudinal and Neo‐Institutional Models of Supreme Court Decision Making: An Empirical and Comparative Perspective from Israel," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 556-586, September.
    15. Álvaro Bustos & Tonja Jacobi, 2014. "Strategic Judicial Preference Revelation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 113-137.
    16. Jule Krüger & Ragnhild Nordås, 2020. "A latent variable approach to measuring wartime sexual violence," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 728-739, November.
    17. Smith, Stephen M. & Gibson, Cosette M., 1988. "Industrial Diversification In Nonmetropolitan Counties And Its Effect On Economic Stability," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 13(2), pages 1-9, December.
    18. Bird, Miriam & Wennberg, Karl, 2014. "Regional influences on the prevalence of family versus non-family start-ups," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 421-436.
    19. Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2016. "Do diversity, creativity and localized competition promote endogenous firm formation? Evidence from a high-tech US industry," MPRA Paper 72349, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Moaniba, Igam M. & Su, Hsin-Ning & Lee, Pei-Chun, 2019. "On the drivers of innovation: Does the co-evolution of technological diversification and international collaboration matter?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:10:y:2013:i:1:p:1-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1740-1461 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.