Under the acclimation effect view, recent appointees to the Court modify their behavior in systematic ways early in their tenure as opposed to their later decisional tendencies. Similarly, many studies have examined the chief justice’s unique behavior.This study blends these two rich strands and explores whether chief justices demonstrate an acclimation effect, such that their behavior changes systematically through time. Using more than a century of Court data, this study examines whether new chief justices’ concurrence and dissent rates decline and whether they write fewer individual opinions gradually. I find that the chief justice’s position serves to create an incentive structure that is uniquely associated with declining rates of specially concurring and dissenting votes in certain cases. Also, new chief justices pen fewer special concurrences and dissents in some policy areas. My results hence imply that the chief justice experiences unique acclimation effects in learning to marshal the Court.
Aldrich, J.A. ( 1994). Rational choice theory and the study of American politics . In L. C. Dodd & C. J. (Eds.), The dynamics of American politics: Approaches and interpretations (pp. 208-233). Boulder, CO: Westview.
2.
Baillie, R.T. ( 1996). Long memory processes and fractional integration in econometrics . Journal of Econometrics, 73, 5-59.
3.
Baird, V.A. ( 2007). Answering the call of the Court: How justices and litigants set the Supreme Court agenda. Charlottesville : University Press of Virginia.
4.
Bales, R.F. ( 1958). Task roles and social roles in problem-solving groups . In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, and E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 437-47). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
5.
Baum, L. ( 1988). Measuring policy change in the U.S. Supreme Court . American Political Science Review, 82, 905-912.
6.
Baum, L. ( 1992). Membership change and collective voting change in the United States Supreme Court. The Journal of Politics , 54, 3-24.
7.
Baum, L. ( 1997). The puzzle of judicial behavior. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
8.
Baum, L. ( 2010). The Supreme Court (10th ed.) Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
9.
Beck, N., & Katz, J.N. ( 1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series-cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89, 634-647.
10.
Beck, N., & Katz, J.N. ( 1996). Nuisance vs. substance: specifying and estimating time-series-cross-section models. Political Analysis, 6, 1-36.
11.
Bowen, T. ( 1995). Consensual norms and the freshmen effect of the United States Supreme Court. Social Science Quarterly, 76, 222-231.
12.
Bowen, T., & Scheb, J.M. ( 1993). Freshman opinion writing on the U.S. Supreme Court, 1921-1991 . Judicature, 76, 239-243.
13.
Bowerman, B.L., O’Connell, R.T., & Koehler, A.B. ( 2005). Forecasting, time series and regression: An applied approach (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Brooks Cole.
14.
Box-Steffensmeier, J.M., & Smith, R.M. ( 1998). Investigating political dynamics using fractional integration methods. American Journal of Political Science , 42, 661-689.
15.
Box-Steffensmeier, J.M., & Tomlinson, A.R. (2000). Fractional integration methods in political science. Electoral Studies, 19, 63-76.
16.
Brace, P., & Hall, M.G. ( 1993). Integrated models of judicial dissent. The Journal of Politics, 55, 914-931.
17.
Brenner, S. ( 1982). Strategic choice and opinion assignment on the U.S. Supreme Court: A reexamination. Western Political Quarterly , 35, 204-211.
18.
Brenner, S. ( 1983). Another look at freshmen indecisiveness on the United States Supreme Court. Polity, 16, 320-328.
19.
Brenner, S. ( 1985). Is competence related to majority opinion assignment on the United States Supreme Court? Capital University Law Review, 15, 1135-1139.
20.
Brenner, S. ( 1986). Reassigning the majority opinion on the United States Supreme Court. Justice System Journal, 11, 186-195.
21.
Brenner, S. ( 1990). Measuring policy leadership on the U.S. Supreme Court: A focus on majority opinion authorship. In H. J. Spaeth & S. Brenner (Eds.), Studies in U.S. Supreme Court behavior (pp. 136-148). New York, NY : Garland.
22.
Brenner, S., & Hagle, T.M. ( 1996). Opinion writing and acclimation effect. Political Behavior, 18, 235-261.
23.
Brenner, S., & Palmer, J. ( 1988). The time taken to write majority opinions as a determinant of opinion assignment on the Vinson Court. Judicature , 72, 179-184.
24.
Brenner, S., & Spaeth, H.J. ( 1986). Issue specialization as a variable in opinion assignment in the Burger Court. Western Political Quarterly , 39, 520-527.
25.
Brenner, S., & Spaeth, H.J. ( 1988). Ideological positions as a variable in the authoring of dissenting opinions on the Warren and Burger Courts. American Politics Quarterly, 16, 317-328.
26.
Caldeira, G.A., & Zorn, C.J.W. ( 1998). Of time and consensual norms in the Supreme Court . American Journal of Political Science, 42, 874-902.
Citron, R. ( 2006, July). Process makes perfect: John Roberts’ marked, and positive, influence on the Supreme Court. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/id/2145159/
29.
Chief justice says his goal is more consensus on the Court. (2006 a, May). The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/22/washington/22justice.html?_r=1andoref=slogin
30.
Clarke, H. .D., & Lebo, M.J. ( 2003). Fractional (co)integration and governing party support in Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 283-301.
31.
Collins, P.M., Jr. ( 2009). Cognitive dissonance on the U.S. Supreme Court . Political Research Quarterly, 62, 1-15.
32.
Corley, P.C. ( 2010). Concurring opinion writing on the U.S. Supreme Court . Albany, NY: SUNY.
33.
Danelski, D.J. ( 1960, April). Assignment of the court’s opinion by the chief justice. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois.
34.
Danelski, D.J. ( 1989). The influence of the chief justice in the decisional process of the Supreme Court. In S. Goldman & A. Sarat (Eds.), American Court systems: Readings in judicial process and behavior (2nd ed.; pp. 506-519). San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.
35.
Davis, S. ( 1990). Power on the court: chief justice Rehnquist’s opinion assignments. Judicature, 74, 66-72.
36.
De Boef, S., & Granato, J. ( 1997). Near-integrated data and the analysis of political relationships . American Journal of Political Science, 41, 619-640.
37.
Dickey, D.A., & Fuller, W. ( 1979). Distribution of estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 84, 427-431.
38.
Dickinson, M.J., & Lebo, M.J. ( 2007). Reexamining the growth of the institutional presidency, 1940-2000. Journal of Politics, 69, 206-219.
39.
Early Supreme Court consensus fades. (2006b, June 30) The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Scotus-Wrap-Up.html?r=1
40.
Engle, R.F., & Granger, C.W.J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica , 55, 251-276.
41.
Epstein, L., & Knight, J. ( 1998). The choices Justices make. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
42.
Epstein, L., Quinn, K., Martin, A.D., & Segal, J.A. ( 2008). On the perils of drawing inferences about Supreme Court Justices from their first few years of service. Judicature , 91, 168-179.
43.
Epstein, L., Segal, J.A., Spaeth, H.J., & Walker, T.G. ( 2007). The Supreme Court compendium: Data, decisions, and developments (4th ed.). Washington, DC : Congressional Quarterly.
44.
Fish, P.G. ( 1984). The office of the chief justice. Charlottesville: White Burkett Miller Center, University of Virginia.
45.
Flemming, R.A., & Wood, B.D. ( 1997). The public and the Supreme Court: Individual justice responsiveness to American policy moods. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 468-498.
46.
Frank, J.P. ( 1954). Fred Vinson and the chief justiceship. University of Chicago Law Review, 21, 212-246.
47.
Frank, J.P. ( 1957). Harlan Fiske Stone: An estimate. Stanford Law Review, 9, 621-632.
48.
Gerber, S.D., & Park, K. ( 1997). The quixotic search for consensus on the U.S. Supreme Court: A cross-judicial empirical analysis of the Rehnquist Court Justices . American Political Science Review, 91, 390-408.
49.
Granger, C. W .J. ( 1980). Long memory relationships and the aggregation of dynamic models. Journal of Econometrics, 14, 227-238.
50.
Granger, C.W.J., & Newbold, P. ( 1974). Spurious regression in econometrics. Journal of Econometrics, 2, 111-120.
51.
Hagle, T. ( 1993). Freshmen effects for Supreme Court Justices. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 1142-1157.
52.
Haines, D. ( 1977). Rolling back the top in chief justice Burger’s opinion assignment desk. University of Pittsburgh Law Review , 38, 631-695.
53.
Haynie, S.L. ( 1992). Leadership and consensus on the U.S. Supreme Court. Journal of Politics, 54, 1158-1169.
54.
Heck, E.V., & Hall, M.G. ( 1981). Bloc voting and the freshman justice revisited . The Journal of Politics, 43, 852-860.
55.
Hettinger, V.A., Lindquist, S.A., & Martinek, W.L. (2003). Acclimation effects and separate opinion writing in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 782-810.
Howard, J.W. ( 1968). On the fluidity of judicial choice. American Political Science Review, 62, 4351.
58.
Hughes, C.E. ( 1928). The Supreme Court of the United States. New York, NY: Columbia University Press .
59.
Hurwitz, M.S., & Lanier, D.N. ( 2004). I respectfully dissent: consensus, agendas, and policymaking on the U.S. Supreme Court, 1888-1999. Review of Policy Research , 21, 429-445.
60.
Hurwitz, M.S., & Lanier, D.N. ( 2008, August). chief justice Roberts and consensus on the U.S. Supreme Court. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, Massachusetts.
61.
Hurwitz, M.S., & Stefko, J.V. ( 2004). Acclimation and attitudes: "Newcomer" justices and precedent conformance on the Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly , 57(1), 121-129.
62.
Johnston, R.E. ( 1976). Supreme Court voting behavior: A comparison of the Warren and Burger Courts. In R. L. Peabody (Ed.), Cases in American politics (pp. 71-110). New York, NY: Praeger.
63.
Kaheny, E.B., Haire, S.B., & Benesh, S.C. ( 2008). Change over tenure: Voting, variance and decision making on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 490-503.
64.
Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P., & Shin, Y. ( 1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. Journal of Econometrics, 54, 159-178.
65.
Lanier, D.N. ( 2003). Of time and judicial behavior: U.S. Supreme Court agenda-setting and decision-making, 1888-1997. Selinsgrove, PA: Susquehanna University Press.
66.
Lanier, D.N., & Wood, S.L. ( 2001). Moving on up: institutional position, politics and the chief justice. American Review of Politics, 22, 93-127.
67.
Lebo, M.J., & Box-Steffensmeier, J.M. (2008). Dynamics conditional correlations in political science. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 688-704.
68.
Lebo, M.J., McGlynn, A.J., & Koger, G. ( 2007). Strategic party government: Party influence in Congress, 1789-2000. American Journal of Political Science , 51, 464-481.
69.
Lebo, M.J., Walker, R.W., & Clarke, H.D. ( 2000). You must remember this: Dealing with long memory in political analyses. Electoral Studies, 19, 31-48.
70.
Lewis, A. ( 1964). Gideon’s trumpet. New York, NY: Vintage.
71.
Maltzman, F., Spriggs, J.F., II, & Wahlbeck, P.J. (2000). Crafting law on the Supreme Court: The collegial game. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
72.
Maltzman, F., & Wahlbeck, P.J. (1996). May it please the chief: a model of opinion assignment in the Rehnquist Court. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 421-443.
73.
Martin, A.D., & Quinn, K.M. ( 2002). Dynamic ideal point estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court. Political Analysis , 10, 134-153.
74.
Mason, A.T. ( 1956). Harlan Fiske Stone: Pillar of the law. New York, NY: Archon.
75.
Mason, A.T. ( 1967). The chief justice of the United States: Premis inter pares. Journal of Public Law, 20, 17-35.
76.
Maveety, N. ( 2003). Concurrence and the study of judicial behavior in American political Science. Juridicia International, 8, 173-185.
77.
McCloskey, R.G. ( 2010). The American Supreme Court (Rev. ed.). Sanford Levinson: University of Chicago Press.
78.
McGuire, K.T., & Palmer, B. ( 1995). Issue fluidity on the U.S. Supreme Court. American Political Science Review, 89, 691-702.
79.
McLauchlan, W.P. ( 1972). Research note: Ideology and conflict in Supreme Court opinion assignment, 1946-62. Western Political Quarterly , 25, 16-27.
80.
Mishler, W., & Sheehan, R.S. ( 1996). Public opinion, the attitudinal model and Supreme Court decision-making: A micro analytic perspective. Journal of Politics, 58, 169-200.
81.
Mondak, J.J. ( 1992). Institutional legitimacy, policy legitimacy, and the Supreme Court. American Politics Quarterly, 20, 457-477.
82.
Murphy, W.F. ( 1962). Marshaling the Court: Leadership, bargaining and the judicial process. University of Chicago Law Review, 29, 640-672.
83.
Murphy, W.F. ( 1964). Elements of judicial strategy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
84.
O’Brien, D.M. ( 1999). Institutional norms and Supreme Court opinions: On reconsidering the rise of individual opinions. In C. W. Clayton & H. Gillman (Eds.), Supreme Court decision-making: new institutionalist approaches (pp. 91-113). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
85.
O’Brien, D. .M. (2008). Storm center: The Supreme Court in American politics (8th ed.). New York, NY : W. W. Norton.
86.
Pacelle, R.L. ( 1991). The transformation of the Supreme Court’s agenda: From the new deal to the Reagan administration. Boulder, CO: Westview.
87.
Peterson, S.A. ( 1981). Dissent inAmerican Courts. The Journal of Politics, 43, 412-434.
88.
Pritchett, C.H. ( 1941). Division of opinion among justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, 1939-1941. American Political Science Review , 35, 890-898.
89.
Pritchett, C.H. ( 1948). The Roosevelt Court: A study in judicial values, 1937-1947 . Chicago, IL: Quadrangle .
90.
Rathjen, G.J. ( 1974). Policy goals, strategic choice and majority opinion assignments in the U.S. Supreme Court: A replication. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 18, 713-724.
91.
Rehnquist, W.H. ( 1976). chief justices I never knew. Hastings Law Quarterly, 3, 637-655.
92.
Robinson, P.M. ( 1995). Gaussian semi-parametric estimation of long range dependence . Annals of Statistics, 23, 1630-1661.
93.
Rohde, D.W. ( 1972). Policy goals, strategic choice and majority opinion assignments in the U.S. Supreme Court. Midwest Journal of Political Science , 16, 652-682.
94.
Rohde, D.W., & Spaeth, H.J. ( 1989). Ideology, strategy and Supreme Court decisions: William Rehnquist as chief justice. Judicature, 72, 247-250.
95.
Savage, D.G. ( 2010). Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
96.
Schubert, G. ( 1962). The 1960 term of the Supreme Court: A psychological analysis . American Political Science Review, 56, 90-107.
97.
Schubert, G. ( 1965). The judicial mind: attitudes and ideologies of Supreme Court Justices, 1946-1963. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
98.
Schubert, G. ( 1974). The judicial mind revisited: psychometric analysis of Supreme Court ideology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
99.
Schwartz, B. ( 1983). Super chief: Earl Warren and his Supreme Court-A judicial biography. New York: New York University Press.
100.
Schwartz, B. ( 1993). A history of the Supreme Court. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
101.
Schwartz, B. ( 1996). Decision: How the Supreme Court decides cases . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
102.
Scigliano, R. ( 1971). The Supreme Court and the presidency. New York, NY: Free Press.
103.
Segal, J.A. ( 1997). Separation-of-powers games in the positive theory of Congress and Courts. American Political Science Review , 91, 28-44.
104.
Segal, J.A., & Spaeth, H.J. ( 1993). The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press .
105.
Segal, J.A., & Spaeth, H.J. ( 2002). The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model revisited . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, J.F. ( 1980). Independent journey: The life of William O. Douglas . New York, NY: Penguin.
108.
Slotnick, E.E. ( 1978). The chief justices and self-assignment of majority opinions: A research note. Western Political Quarterly, 31, 219-225.
109.
Slotnick, E.E. ( 1979a). Who speaks for the Court? Majority opinion assignment from Taft to Burger. American Journal of Political Science , 23, 60-77.
110.
Slotnick, E.E. ( 1979b). Judicial career patterns and majority opinion assignment on the Supreme Court. Journal of Politics, 41, 640-648.
111.
Snyder, E.C. ( 1958). The Supreme Court as a small group. Social Forces, 36, 232-238.
112.
Spaeth, H.J. ( 1984). Distributive justice: Majority opinion assignments in the Burger Court. Judicature, 76, 299-304.
113.
Spaeth, H.J. ( 2008). United States Supreme Court judicial database, 1953-2007 terms [Computer File] (updated annually; ICPSR Study No. 9422). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Political Science [producer]. Lexington, KY: S. Sidney Ulmer Project for Research in Law and Judicial Politics , Department of Political Science, University of Kentucky (distributor).
114.
Steamer, R. ( 1986). chief justice: Leadership and the Supreme Court . Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
115.
Tate, C.N. ( 1981). Personal attribute models of the voting behavior of U.S. Supreme Court Justices: Liberalism in civil liberties and economics decisions, 1946-1978. American Political Science Review, 75, 355-367.
116.
Tate, C.N., & Handberg, R. ( 1991). Time binding and theory building in personal attribute models of Supreme Court voting behavior, 1916-1988. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 460-480.
117.
Turner, C.C., Way, L.B., & Maveety, N. ( 2010). Beginning to write separately: The origins and development of concurring judicial opinions. Journal of Supreme Court History, 35, 93-109.
118.
Ulmer, S.S. ( 1970a). The use of power in the Supreme Court: The opinion assignments of Earl Warren, 1953-60. Journal of Public Law , 19, 49-67.
119.
Ulmer, S.S. ( 1970b). Dissent behavior and the social background of Supreme Court Justices. Journal of Politics, 32, 580-598.
120.
Ulmer, S.S. ( 1986). Exploring the dissent patterns of eleven Chief Justices: John Marshall to Warren Burger. In S. Goldman & C. M. Lamb (Eds.), Judicial conflict and consensus: Behavioral studies of American appellate Courts (pp. 50-67). Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
121.
Wahlbeck, P.J., Spriggs, J.F., II., & Maltzman, F. (1999). The politics of dissents and concurrences on the U.S. Supreme Court. American Politics Quarterly, 27, 488-514.
122.
Walker, T.G., Epstein, L., & Dixon, W.J. ( 1988). On the mysterious demise of consensual norms in the United States Supreme Court. The Journal of Politics, 50, 361-389.
123.
Way, L.B., & Turner, C.C. ( 2006). Disagreement on the Rehnquist Court: The dynamics of Supreme Court concurrence. American Politics Research, 34, 293-318.
124.
White, H. ( 1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix and direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817-838.
125.
Wood, S.L., Keith, L.C., Lanier, D.N., & Ogundele, A. ( 1998a). "Acclimation effects" for Supreme Court Justices: A cross validation, 1888-1940. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 690-697.
126.
Wood, S.L., Keith, L.C., Lanier, D.N., & Ogundele, A. ( 1998b). The Supreme Court, 1888-1940. Social Science History, 22, 201-224.
127.
Wood, S., Keith, L.C., Lanier, D., & Ogundele, A. ( 2000). The opinion assignments of the Chief Justices, 1888-1940 . Social Science Quarterly, 81, 798-809.
128.
Woodward, B., & Armstrong, S. ( 1979). The brethren: Inside the Supreme Court. New York, NY: Avon.
129.
Zink, J.R., Spriggs, J.F., II., & Scott, J.T. (2009). Courting the public: The influence of decision attributes on individuals’ views of Court opinions . The Journal of Politics, 71, 909-925.
