Judicial interaction on the latham court: A quantitative study of voting patterns on the high court 1935-1950

Australian Journal of Politics and History

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 330-350

  Smyth, Russell ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035536683     PISSN: 00049522     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8497.00232     Document Type: Review

References (67)

1. 1 This article is part of an ongoing project investigating citation practice, decision making and voting patterns in Australian and New Zealand Courts. The author thanks two anonymous referees for helpful comments on an earlier version.
2. 2 S. Brenner, T. Caporale and H. Winter, "Fluidity and Coalition Sizes on the Supreme Court", Jurimetrics 36 (1996), p. 245; P. Edelman and J. Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Mathematics", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 63; S. Gerber and K. Park, "The Quixotic Search for Consensus on the US Supreme Court: A Cross Judicial Empirical Analysis of the Rehnquist Court Justices", American Political Science Review, 91 (1997), p. 390; L. Baker, "Interdisciplinary Due Diligence: The Case for Common Sense in the Search for the Swing Justice", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 187.
3. 2 S. Brenner, T. Caporale and H. Winter, "Fluidity and Coalition Sizes on the Supreme Court", Jurimetrics 36 (1996), p. 245; P. Edelman and J. Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Mathematics", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 63; S. Gerber and K. Park, "The Quixotic Search for Consensus on the US Supreme Court: A Cross Judicial Empirical Analysis of the Rehnquist Court Justices", American Political Science Review, 91 (1997), p. 390; L. Baker, "Interdisciplinary Due Diligence: The Case for Common Sense in the Search for the Swing Justice", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 187.
4. 2 S. Brenner, T. Caporale and H. Winter, "Fluidity and Coalition Sizes on the Supreme Court", Jurimetrics 36 (1996), p. 245; P. Edelman and J. Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Mathematics", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 63; S. Gerber and K. Park, "The Quixotic Search for Consensus on the US Supreme Court: A Cross Judicial Empirical Analysis of the Rehnquist Court Justices", American Political Science Review, 91 (1997), p. 390; L. Baker, "Interdisciplinary Due Diligence: The Case for Common Sense in the Search for the Swing Justice", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 187.
5. 2 S. Brenner, T. Caporale and H. Winter, "Fluidity and Coalition Sizes on the Supreme Court", Jurimetrics 36 (1996), p. 245; P. Edelman and J. Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Mathematics", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 63; S. Gerber and K. Park, "The Quixotic Search for Consensus on the US Supreme Court: A Cross Judicial Empirical Analysis of the Rehnquist Court Justices", American Political Science Review, 91 (1997), p. 390; L. Baker, "Interdisciplinary Due Diligence: The Case for Common Sense in the Search for the Swing Justice", Southern California Law Review, 70 (1997), p. 187.
6. 3 For example, see J. Beatty, "Decision-Making on the Iowa Supreme Court - 1965-1969", Drake Law Review, 19 (1970), p. 342; J. Leonard, "Ideology and Judicial Behavior: A Statistical Study of the Ohio Supreme Court: 1970, 1975, 1980 and 1985 Terms", University of Cincinnati Law Review, 57 (1989), p. 935.
7. 3 For example, see J. Beatty, "Decision-Making on the Iowa Supreme Court - 1965-1969", Drake Law Review, 19 (1970), p. 342; J. Leonard, "Ideology and Judicial Behavior: A Statistical Study of the Ohio Supreme Court: 1970, 1975, 1980 and 1985 Terms", University of Cincinnati Law Review, 57 (1989), p. 935.
8. 4 P. McCormick, "Birds of a Feather: Alliances and Influences on the Lamer Court 1990-1997", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 36 (1998), p. 339; P. McCormick, "Follow the Leader: Judicial Power and Judicial Leadership on the Laskin Court, 1973-1984", Queens Law Journal, 24 (1998), p. 237; P. McCormick, "The Most Dangerous Justice: Measuring Judicial Power on the Lamer Court 1991-97", Dalhousie Law Journal, 22 (1999), p. 93.
9. 4 P. McCormick, "Birds of a Feather: Alliances and Influences on the Lamer Court 1990-1997", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 36 (1998), p. 339; P. McCormick, "Follow the Leader: Judicial Power and Judicial Leadership on the Laskin Court, 1973-1984", Queens Law Journal, 24 (1998), p. 237; P. McCormick, "The Most Dangerous Justice: Measuring Judicial Power on the Lamer Court 1991-97", Dalhousie Law Journal, 22 (1999), p. 93.
10. 4 P. McCormick, "Birds of a Feather: Alliances and Influences on the Lamer Court 1990-1997", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 36 (1998), p. 339; P. McCormick, "Follow the Leader: Judicial Power and Judicial Leadership on the Laskin Court, 1973-1984", Queens Law Journal, 24 (1998), p. 237; P. McCormick, "The Most Dangerous Justice: Measuring Judicial Power on the Lamer Court 1991-97", Dalhousie Law Journal, 22 (1999), p. 93.
11. 5 R. Smyth, "Some are More Equal than Others - An Empirical Investigation into the Voting Behaviour of the Mason Court", Canberra Law Review, 6, 193 (1999).
12. 6 G. Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court", Politics, 3, 21 (1968), p. 24.
13. 7 Ibid, p. 21.
14. 8 Important general exceptions are G. Sawer, Australian Federalism in the Courts (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1967) and B. Galligan, Politics of the High Court (St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1978). Some articles that provide quantitative analysis of specific aspects of the politics of the High Court are Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court"; G. Schubert, "Judicial Attitudes and Policy-Making in the Dixon Court", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 7 (1969), p. 1; R. Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", Politics, 4 (1969), p. 20;
15. 8 Important general exceptions are G. Sawer, Australian Federalism in the Courts (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1967) and B. Galligan, Politics of the High Court (St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1978). Some articles that provide quantitative analysis of specific aspects of the politics of the High Court are Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court"; G. Schubert, "Judicial Attitudes and Policy-Making in the Dixon Court", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 7 (1969), p. 1; R. Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", Politics, 4 (1969), p. 20;
16. 8 Important general exceptions are G. Sawer, Australian Federalism in the Courts (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1967) and B. Galligan, Politics of the High Court (St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1978). Some articles that provide quantitative analysis of specific aspects of the politics of the High Court are Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court"; G. Schubert, "Judicial Attitudes and Policy-Making in the Dixon Court", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 7 (1969), p. 1; R. Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", Politics, 4 (1969), p. 20;
17. 8 Important general exceptions are G. Sawer, Australian Federalism in the Courts (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1967) and B. Galligan, Politics of the High Court (St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1978). Some articles that provide quantitative analysis of specific aspects of the politics of the High Court are Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court"; G. Schubert, "Judicial Attitudes and Policy-Making in the Dixon Court", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 7 (1969), p. 1; R. Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", Politics, 4 (1969), p. 20;
18. 8 Important general exceptions are G. Sawer, Australian Federalism in the Courts (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1967) and B. Galligan, Politics of the High Court (St Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1978). Some articles that provide quantitative analysis of specific aspects of the politics of the High Court are Schubert, "Political Ideology and the High Court"; G. Schubert, "Judicial Attitudes and Policy-Making in the Dixon Court", Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 7 (1969), p. 1; R. Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", Politics, 4 (1969), p. 20;
19. A. Blackshield, "Quantitative Analysis: The High Court of Australia 1964-1969", Lawasia, 3 (1972), p. 1;
20. A. Blackshield, "Judges and the Court System" in G. Evans ed., Labor and the Constitution 1972-1975 (Melbourne: Heinemann, 1977);
21. A. Blackshield, "X/Y/Z/N Scales: The High Court of Australia 1972-1976", in R. Tomasic ed., Understanding Lawyers (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1978).
22. 9 C. Lloyd, "Not Peace But a Sword - The High Court Under J.G. Latham", Adelaide Law Review, 11 (1987), p. 175. The "High Court Project" at ANU, which is scheduled to produce a book published by Oxford University Press in 2001, represents a significant attempt to change this situation.
23. 10 Z. Cowen, Sir John Latham and Other Papers (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1965). The two journal articles are Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", and Lloyd, "Not Peace But a Sword".
24. 11 Bank of NSW v Commonwealth (1948) 76 CLR 1.
25. 12 British Medical Association v Commonwealth (1949) 79 CLR 201.
26. 13 Communist Party of Australia v Commonwealth (1951) 83 CLR 1.
27. 14 Cowen, Sir John Latham, p. 34.
28. 15 Lloyd, "Not Peace But a Sword, p. 185.
29. 16 Ibid, 182.
30. 17 Of course some of the personal differences, such as those between Evatt and Starke, were motivated at least in part by ideological differences. This point is discussed in more detail later in the text.
31. 18 Ibid.
32. 19 McCormick, "Birds of a Feather", pp. 340-341.
33. 20 This is consistent with the methodology adopted in recent similar studies, see McCormick "Birds of a Feather", pp. 341-343;
34. Edelman and Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice", p. 79;
35. Smyth, "Some are More Equal than Others".
36. 21 McCormick, "Birds of a Feather", p. 342.
37. 22 "The Supreme Court, 1995 Term - Leading Cases", Harvard Law Review, 110, 335 (1996), p. 369.
38. 23 McCormick "Bird of a Feather" p. 343
39. 24 (1948) 77 CLR 403.
40. 25 (1947) 73 CLR 549.
41. 26 Smyth, "Some are More Equal than Others".
42. 27 McCormick, "Birds of a Feather".
43. 28 Smyth, "Some are More Equal than Others".
44. 29 Figures in this paragraph for the Supreme Court of Canada are from McCormick, "Birds of a Feather". Figures for the High Court 1985-1994 are from Smyth, "Some are More Equal than Others.
45. 30 McCormick, "Birds of a Feather", p. 349.
46. 31 P. Edelman and J. Chen, "Duel Diligence: Second Thoughts About the Supremes as the Sultans of Swing", (1997) 70 Southern California Law Review 219, p. 233.
47. 32 Cowen, Sir John Latham. pp. 34-35.
48. 33 Lloyd, "Not Peace But a Sword", p. 187.
49. 34 Edelman and Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice"; McCormick, "The Most Dangerous Justice".
50. 34 Edelman and Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice"; McCormick, "The Most Dangerous Justice".
51. 35 Ibid, pp. 71-73.
52. 36 For an attempt to rank judges according to the number of citations they receive in later cases, after adjusting for depreciation of precedent and length of service see R. Smyth, "Who Gets Cited? An Empirical Study of Judicial Presitge in the High Court", University of Queensland Law Journal, 21, 7 (2000). In this study Dixon tops the list and Evatt and Latham perform considerably better than McTiernan.
53. 37 Edelman and Chen, "The Most Dangerous Justice", pp. 64-65.
54. 38 McCormick, "Birds of a Feather", p. 352.
55. 39 Ibid, p. 353.
56. 40 Ibid.
57. 41 Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court", p. 27.
58. 42 Starke to Latham, 22 February 1937, cited in Lloyd, "Not Peace But a Sword", p. 181.
59. 43 Ibid., 8 January 1936, p. 181.
60. 44 P. Crockett, Evatt - A Life (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1993) p. 83.
61. 45 Ibid.
62. 46 Douglas, "Judges and Policy on the Latham Court".
63. 47 Ibid., p. 30.
64. 48 Ibid., p. 35.
65. 49 Ibid., p. 36.
66. 50 Ibid.
67. 51 See the study by Smyth, "Who Gets Cited?". In this study Starke performs considerably better than either McTiernan or Rich.