Dissents on multimember courts cannot be explained by legal factors alone

Evidence

The political perspective on judicial decision making begins with the phenomenon of dissenting opinions on multimember courts. In almost half the cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years, one or more justices dissented. Although dissent rates are lower on federal courts of appeals and state appellate courts, the judges in the other appellate courts also disagree on how cases should be resolved. According to the political perspective, these disagreements cannot be attributed to legal factors. When a multimember court decides a case, all the judges are construing the same enactments, interpreting the same precedents, and applying the same law to the same set of facts. Thus, differences in the law or in the facts cannot explain differences in judgment. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2561

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes the premises of the political-perspective framework the chapter then elaborates.
• XREF: Anchors the attitudinal/political model of decision making central to the course’s treatment of interpretation. — connects to: Hidden value judgments, not logic, drive key judicial decisions — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2550; Judges seek approval from audiences they esteem, not only legal or policy ends — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2624; Supreme Court unanimity collapsed from near-total to under a quarter of decisions — Lawrence M. Friedman, A History of American Law, 4134
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2561