At the Washington Post Sarah Turberville and Anthony Marcum point out something I have noted and documented multiple times:
The ratio is staggering. According to the Supreme Court Database, since 2000 a unanimous decision has been more likely than any other result — averaging 36 percent of all decisions. Even when the court did not reach a unanimous judgment, the justices often secured overwhelming majorities, with 7-2 or 8-1 judgments making up roughly 15 percent of decisions. The 5-4 decisions, by comparison, occurred in only 19 percent of cases.
or, said another way, the emphasis on the 5-4 decisions misrepresents what the Supreme Court is doing. In by far the greater number of cases the law is actually pretty clear.
What is missing from the discussion is that there are only two reasons that cases make it to the Supreme Court at all. Either lower courts have erred, including by ideological bias, or the parties involved aren’t satisfied with the law, want an outcome that can’t be supported by the law, and want the Supreme Court to give it to them.
In such cases we should not rejoice when the Supreme Court gives it to them. The law should prevail. Making an end run around the law through the Supreme Court creates lasting societal rifts and these build, one on the other.
I was unaware of the wide majority statistic and before I even read your comments I immediately thought to myself “then what are such cases even doing in the Supreme Court?†That’s a significant indictment of lower courts, especially the level right below the Supremes.
The 19% number is deceiving. Most cases just aren’t that interesting or especially political, except for some interest groups. What is important is the percentage of cases that are perceived as having significant political impact or implications, like Roe v Wade, that are decided 5-4. That will be a much higher percentage I bet.
Steve