Abstract
The decision to recuse presents Supreme Court justices with a no-win choice between preserving legitimacy and risking the possibility of an evenly divided vote. A recent proposal would allow retired justices to serve when a justice is absent to help alleviate this tension. Here, we examine the potential implications of this proposal using more than 60 years of unique counterfactual data. Our results suggest that replacement justices could have changed the policy set by the Court in only a small subset of cases and, more importantly, could have helped the Court avoid more than a quarter of their even divisions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
