Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note

4 Journal of Law (3 Journal of Legal Metrics) 361 (2014)

University of Houston Law Center Working Paper No. 2014-A-13

24 Pages Posted: 31 May 2014 Last revised: 1 Aug 2015

Date Written: February 3, 2015

Abstract

A number of researchers have recently published new measures of the Supreme Court’s behavior in resolving conflicts in the lower courts. These new measures represent an improvement over prior, cruder approaches, but it turns out that measuring the Court’s resolutions of conflicts is surprisingly difficult. The aim of this methodological comment is to describe those difficulties and to establish several conclusions that follow from them. First, the new measures of the Court’s behavior are certainly imprecise and may reflect biased samples. Second, using the Supreme Court Database, which some studies rely on to assemble a dataset of cases resolving conflicts, exacerbates the problems. Third, real precision may be infeasible given the nature of the enterprise.

Keywords: federal courts, Supreme Court, lower courts, circuit splits, certiorari, empirical legal studies, Supreme Court Database

Suggested Citation

Bruhl, Aaron-Andrew P., Measuring Circuit Splits: A Cautionary Note (February 3, 2015). 4 Journal of Law (3 Journal of Legal Metrics) 361 (2014); University of Houston Law Center Working Paper No. 2014-A-13. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2443312 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2443312

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl (Contact Author)

William & Mary Law School ( email )

South Henry Street
P.O. Box 8795
Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
236
rank
124,908
Abstract Views
1,936
PlumX Metrics