- Justice is served? May 5
The Supreme Court is supposed to deliver impartial rulings grounded solely in law, not personal belief. But a new study in The New York Times suggests that may not always be the case, at least when it comes to issues involving free speech.
In examining 4,519 votes between 1953 and 2011, the study found that justices had a tendency to support free speech claims when cases aligned with their politics. That is, they were more likely to support free speech when they agreed with said speech.
For instance, conservative Justice Antonin Scalia sided with conservative speech claims or speakers 65.2 percent of the time, though he supported just 20.7 percent of liberal free speech arguments. On the flip side, retired Justice John Paul Stevens backed liberal speech claims 62.8 percent of the time, but supported only 46.9 percent of conservative ones.
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- Why the West should let Russia have eastern Ukraine
- The amazing resurrection of Mitt Romney
- The dangers of our passionless American life
- What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
- Even critics of the euro didn't see this coming
- 7 grammar rules you really should pay attention to
- Why you should stop believing in evolution
- 4 strategies for organizing your money, based on your personality
- The essential techniques that every home cook should know
- How America's broken immigration system is failing the military
Subscribe to the Week