- 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
- What the Middle Ages can tell us about the GOP's big charity myth
- The U.S. is about to sell weapons to Vietnam. That's bad news for China.
- Why is the Pentagon stuffing caves in Norway full of tanks?
- The one thing the New Atheists get right about religion
- 43 TV shows to watch in 2014
- How to be the most productive person in your office — and still get home by 5:30 p.m.
- The uncomfortable truth in The Giving Tree
- 3 horrific inaccuracies in Homeland's depiction of Islamabad
- The U.S. government is actually trouncing Ebola. When will it get credit?
- Did Republicans overshoot on the Ebola panic?
Subscribe to the Week