Replication data for: Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court (doi:10.7910/DVN/SR3ZJX)

View:

Part 1: Document Description
Part 2: Study Description
Part 3: Data Files Description
Part 4: Variable Description
Part 5: Other Study-Related Materials
Entire Codebook

Document Description

Citation

Title:

Replication data for: Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court

Identification Number:

doi:10.7910/DVN/SR3ZJX

Distributor:

Harvard Dataverse

Date of Distribution:

2011-07-12

Version:

Bibliographic Citation:

Kaitlyn L. Sill; Joseph Daniel Ura; Stacia L. Haynie, 2011, "Replication data for: Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SR3ZJX, Harvard Dataverse, V2, UNF:5:axHkc0J0eQPQ4/DiyUSQag== [fileUNF]

Study Description

Citation

Title:

Replication data for: Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court

Identification Number:

doi:10.7910/DVN/SR3ZJX

Authoring Entity:

Kaitlyn L. Sill (Pacific Lutheran University)

Joseph Daniel Ura (Texas A&M University)

Stacia L. Haynie (Louisiana State University)

Distributor:

Harvard Dataverse

Access Authority:

Joseph Daniel Ura

Date of Deposit:

2011-07-12

Holdings Information:

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/SR3ZJX

Study Scope

Abstract:

Previous research indicates that U.S. Supreme Court justices who are likely to control opinion assignments may withhold votes in an initial round of conference voting in circumstances that suggest that this behavior has strategic origins. Specifically, scholars have suggested that justices may pass in conference voting to gain control over the opinion assignment. This study extends this literature by developing a theory of the relationship between strategic passing in a conference vote and opinion assignment, which is assessed through a quantitative analysis of opinion assignments made by Chief Justice Burger. Specifically, we argue that justices selected to write opinions by those who have passed to strategically join a majority will be more ideologically peripheral compared to the majority coalition as a whole than justices who are assigned to write opinions following conference votes cast in order of seniority. Consistent with this theory, we find that Chief Justice Burger, indeed, made opinion assignments that diverged more strongly from the ideological composition of the Court’s majority when he passed in conference compared with opinion assignments he made when he voted in order of seniority.

Methodology and Processing

Sources Statement

Data Access

Notes:

Other Study Description Materials

Related Publications

Citation

Title:

Sill, Kaitlyn L., Joseph Daniel Ura, and Stacia L. Haynie. 2010. "Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court" Justice System Journal 31(2): 164-179.

Bibliographic Citation:

Sill, Kaitlyn L., Joseph Daniel Ura, and Stacia L. Haynie. 2010. "Strategic Passing and Opinion Assignemnt on the Burger Court" Justice System Journal 31(2): 164-179.

File Description--f2300420

File: sill, ura, and haynie (2010) jsj.tab

Number of cases: 750
No. of variables per record: 12
Type of File: text/tab-separated-values

Notes:

UNF:5:axHkc0J0eQPQ4/DiyUSQag==

Replication data

Variable Description

List of Variables:

amiciz - =namici-termmean/termstd
natct - natural court
mwc - minimum winning coalition
moapass - majority opinion assignor passed
writerid_01 - majority opinion author ideology (0-1 scale)
meanmajid_01 - mean ideology of the majority coalition (01- scale)
unanimous - unanimous decisions dummy
nyt - lead cases in the nyt--decisions only
amicizXmeanmajid_01
nytXmeanmajid_01
mwcXmeanmajid_01
passXmeanmajid_01

Variables

=namici-termmean/termstd

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:taLrkc7/7zTByUlxClrcGQ==

natural court

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: character

Notes: UNF:5:2v3IhfdG0Wx+BH4ivGHv1g==

minimum winning coalition

f2300420 Location:

Value	Label	Frequency	Text
0.	final vote not an mwc	647

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:wTr3KDDjxmCuBFYK1JcWOg==

majority opinion assignor passed

f2300420 Location:

Value	Label	Frequency	Text
0.	no	672

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:fHkSR2RLMxiaqx1crGdEkw==

majority opinion author ideology (0-1 scale)

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:1zTmGqUDQoHm2/hSTHoUcg==

mean ideology of the majority coalition (01- scale)

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:7f19ktQa36T/U3X1vT5kiw==

unanimous decisions dummy

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:WZrOK8US61BtPkdUu66qrA==

lead cases in the nyt--decisions only

f2300420 Location:

Value	Label	Frequency	Text
0.	not nyt p1 story when decision came down	659
1.	p1 nyt story when case decided	91

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:8M0SAUjKrkzsEe/FJOEb3A==

amicizXmeanmajid_01

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:QcoqRJP3Z3D87WuwQMRk1A==

nytXmeanmajid_01

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:XYA50ZPG+vimehV9xvNn6g==

mwcXmeanmajid_01

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:mSFMih2zo3yOlQsxMIm+tw==

passXmeanmajid_01

f2300420 Location:

Variable Format: numeric

Notes: UNF:5:kUvY9U6jI0ydFP92mzu5DQ==

Other Study-Related Materials

Label:

sill, ura, and haynie (2010) jsj stata output.pdf

Text:

Stata code and output

Notes:

application/pdf