Abstract
In Supreme Court parlance and the political science literature, an ideal point positions a justice in a continuous space and can be interpreted as a quantification of the justice's policy preferences. We present an automated approach to infer such ideal points for justices of the US Supreme Court. This approach combines topic modeling over case opinions with the voting (and endorsing) behavior of justices. Furthermore, given a topic of interest, say the Fourth Amendment, the topic model can be optionally seeded with supervised information to steer the inference of ideal points. Application of this methodology over five years of cases provides interesting perspectives into the leaning of justices on crucial issues, coalitions underlying specific topics, and the role of swing justices in deciding the outcomes of cases.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callMore From: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
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.
