Conference discussion rarely changes a justice’s vote because format discourages interchange

Evidence

These deliberations have little of the sharp give-and-take found in legislative debate. In fact, according to Chief Justice Rehnquist, there was surprisingly little interplay among the justices at conference, and Justice William Douglas observed that conference discussions rarely changed a justice’s view of the case. This may reflect the format for discussion: Allowing each justice to express his or her views without interruption is hardly conducive to lively debate. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1562

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Sharp dissents attacking colleagues rarely damage the justices’ working relationships — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2622; Sitting justices rarely change views, so screening nominees works — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 540; Collegiality only marginally shifts judges’ settled votes — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1338 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Supreme Court justices change their conference votes nine percent of the time #expands (0.90) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1571
• Group interaction only marginally changes judges’ established voting patterns #corroborates (0.88) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2623
• Factual hearings rarely shift entrenched public opinion #corroborates (0.80) — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations, 1145