Abstract
This Comment discusses Spruk and Kovac’s (2020) replication and extension of a prominent judicial ideology measure, the Martin-Quinn (2002) scores. Spruk and Kovac’s main contribution is to replicate Martin-Quinn scores’ Justice-level ideal points incident to a slightly different empirical strategy. Spruk and Kovac then extend their analysis by exploiting another prominent data set, Spaeth et al.’s (2018) Supreme Court Database, and identifying specific case issue codes that account for a large share of the Justice ideal points’ variation. For reasons that I outline below, while the Spruk and Kovac paper largely achieves its immediate replication objectives, the paper’s extension effort, by contrast, confronts inevitable limitations necessarily imposed by the Spaeth et al. database.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.