Jump to content
270soft Forum

US Supreme Court Facts since 1935


Recommended Posts

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75 @Mark_W

Here's some random Supreme Court Facts I put together based off of ideological tracking of SC justices since 1935:

  • Years with the most Liberal SC Justices: 1963-1965 had a 7-2 Liberal Court
  • Years with the most Conservative SC Justices: 1950-1953; 1992-1993 had 7-2 Conservative Courts
  • Longest ideological drought: Liberals have not had an ideological majority on the court since 1969 -- 51 years ago!
  • Years with the highest number of true swing judges on a court: 1977-1978 had 4 ideological swing judges.
  • How conservative is the court as of today? Assuming Barrett doesn't become a true swing judge or flip to a liberal (both unlikely), the court is 5-3-1. Chief Justice Roberts has been an ideological true swing since Trump has taken office, according to a Berkeley University graph that is consistently updated. However, the court as of today has the greatest true conservative majority since 1997.
  • 5 Most Liberal Justices since 1935 in order of most liberal:
    • Douglas (by a long shot)
    • Marshall
    • Sotomayor
    • Stevens (started off as a swing judge, then went way left over time)
    • Brennan
    • Note: Surprising Ginsburg doesn't make the list. She's #6.
  • 5 Most Conservative Justices since 1935 in order of most conservative:
    • Rehnquist
    • Thomas
    • Scalia
    • McReynolds
    • Burger
    • Note: Surprised Alito wasn't on here, but he's #6. I kind of fear Barrett will be on here. 
  • White, Kennedy, and Clark have probably been the swingiest justice since 1935. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Berkeley University graph

Awesome post regarding the SC. Where to find the mentioned graph? I googled these words + Supreme Court but nothing showed up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Awesome post regarding the SC. Where to find the mentioned graph? I googled these words + Supreme Court but nothing showed up.

Google ideology of Supreme Court justices. That’s what I did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Google ideology of Supreme Court justices. That’s what I did. 

I knew that graphic on Wikipedia actually. I just thought there was another one online I missed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

I knew that graphic on Wikipedia actually. I just thought there was another one online I missed.

The researchers have the data on their website 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75 @Mark_W

More facts. Only five SC Justices in the 50-state era have received fewer than 60 votes for Confirmation and won---all five are Republicans and all are current justices:

  • Thomas (52-48, 11 Dems supported and 2 Reps rejected)
  • Alito (58-42, 4 Dems supported and 1 Rep rejected)
  • Gorsuch (54-45, 3 Dems supported)
  • Kavanaugh (50-48, 1 Dem supported)
  • Barrett (52-48, 1 Rep rejects -- first SC Justice in the 50-state era with no bipartisan support)
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, admin_270 said:

Not surprised. Another sign of the degeneration of the republic IMHO is the politicization of judicial nominees.

I absolutely agree. At one point you mentioned a few other things that you through were signs of this. Could you remind me of what those were?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, admin_270 said:

Not surprised. Another sign of the degeneration of the republic IMHO is the politicization of judicial nominees.

The degeneration in that regard started when justices were nominated for ideology and partisan loyalty rather than excelling as judges and clarity - and lack of bias - in judicial and legal views. The Founding Fathers (at least many of them) were still alive when that started.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I absolutely agree. At one point you mentioned a few other things that you through were signs of this. Could you remind me of what those were?

Maybe you're referring to this?

"Some other signs of the degeneration of the republic off-hand are 1. weaponization of the IRS and 2. illegal leaking of personal tax returns."

https://270soft.ipbhost.com/topic/17998-supreme-court-trivia/?tab=comments#comment-311017

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Maybe you're referring to this?

"Some other signs of the degeneration of the republic off-hand are 1. weaponization of the IRS and 2. illegal leaking of personal tax returns."

https://270soft.ipbhost.com/topic/17998-supreme-court-trivia/?tab=comments#comment-311017

 

Maybe I thought you had gone more in depth on that, but that seems like what I'm referring to. What else would you added to this list for the "degeneration of the republic?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Maybe I thought you had gone more in depth on that, but that seems like what I'm referring to. What else would you added to this list for the "degeneration of the republic?"

Coarsening of discourse. Talking about 'lock her up', '25th amendment'. Mass assassination attempt on House members playing baseball. Pelosi talking about Republicans being 'enemies of the state'. Rise of celebrity culture and actors becoming politicians (Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Ventura, Trump, who am I missing?). Outgoing admin setting in motion entrapment of incoming NSA. Off-hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Coarsening of discourse. Talking about 'lock her up', '25th amendment'. Mass assassination attempt on House members playing baseball. Pelosi talking about Republicans being 'enemies of the state'. Rise of celebrity culture and actors becoming politicians (Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Ventura, Trump, who am I missing?). Outgoing admin setting in motion entrapment of incoming NSA. Off-hand.

The United States is in about the same level of decline as a once great empire and civilization as under the Severan Dynasty of the Roman Empire. Militarily and economically, still unchallengeable abroad, but internally, visible division, strife, corruption, and irreconcilable differences kill it from within. That's how the Roman Empire died. It was just a hollow, dead shell by the time the Gothic chieftain-kings were knocking on the Gates of Rome. And it seems U.S. civilization is headed down a very similar path.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patine said:

The United States is in about the same level of decline as a once great empire and civilization as under the Severan Dynasty of the Roman Empire. Militarily and economically, still unchallengeable abroad, but internally, visible division, strife, corruption, and irreconcilable differences kill it from within. That's how the Roman Empire died. It was just a hollow, dead shell by the time the Gothic chieftain-kings were knocking on the Gates of Rome. And it seems U.S. civilization is headed down a very similar path.

Could be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, admin_270 said:

Coarsening of discourse. Talking about 'lock her up', '25th amendment'. Mass assassination attempt on House members playing baseball. Pelosi talking about Republicans being 'enemies of the state'. Rise of celebrity culture and actors becoming politicians (Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Ventura, Trump, who am I missing?). Outgoing admin setting in motion entrapment of incoming NSA. Off-hand.

Yeah, those are all good reasons. This would correspond with that Swedish research article possibly that was posted the other day. I can pin point a lot of early assisting causes and events, but I'd say policies that saw the gradual switching over of anti-Civil Rights Southern Democrats to the Republicans, and the pro-Civil Rights Northern Republicans (Rockefeller Republicans) to the Democrats is the leading factor, since it made the parties partisan as they became more or less ideologically pure -- GOP became the conservative party and Democrats became the liberal party. 1964 only saw a few people switch over (Thurmond was the only major Dem to switch to GOP). 1980 under Reagan saw many more switch (first celebrity turned president/politician) and this is when Congress started its trajectory of hyper-partisanship. Gingrich is like the St. Paul of this episode. He sealed the deal. The Gingrich Rev saw more politicians and states flip allegiances than 1964 and 1980 combined. After Gingrich, you rarely get cross-over voting, agreement on hot issues that need 60 votes, etc. I doubt Reaganism would have survived without Gingrich. I also don't think Trump would have been possible without Gingrich (or Perot in Trump's case). Gingrich, as much as I dislike him, is probably the central US political figure of our lifetime. There's arguments that could be made for Reagan, Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, depending on what one things is important or not. I think for your thesis, Gingrich is probably the key figure, which means both Clintons are, Reagan, Goldwater, LBJ are of at least secondary importance. Gingrich was also a leading figure in demonizing Hillary Clinton when she was First Lady, cobbling her into a boogeyman (boogeywoman). This lasted and hurt her in 2016. That's probably another lasting influence for Gingrich in the 2016 race. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Gingrich is like the St. Paul of this episode.

😆

3 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I also don't think Trump would have been possible without Gingrich

I think there's something to this. Not surprisingly, Trump studied Gingrich's 2012 run.

5 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Gingrich is probably the key figure

Also not surprisingly, Gingrich led the second impeachment in U.S. history.

But I would see Gingrich as more a symptom than anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

😆

I think there's something to this. Not surprisingly, Trump studied Gingrich's 2012 run.

Also not surprisingly, Gingrich led the second impeachment in U.S. history.

But I would see Gingrich as more a symptom than anything else.

Yeah, that's why I said things could be pinpointed earlier, but I think he's the crucial figure. I used the St. Paul analogy. St. Paul is a symptom of Jesus, but without Paul, I doubt Jesus's message would have been spread. Christianity might have just been a sect within Judaism in a local area or something. 

One difference between this analogy is that Gingrich is really just a symptom of many symptoms that come together with no real central "Jesus" or cause. 

How much do you think anti-intellectualism plays a roll in this degeneration?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, vcczar said:

How much do you think anti-intellectualism plays a roll in this degeneration?

Dunno. Certainly Gingrich and Trump are populists, which often involves anti-intellectualism to varying degrees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...