No Hints, No Forecasts, No Previews: An Empirical Analysis of Supreme Court Nominee Candor from Harlan to Kagan
Law & Society Review, Volume 45, Number 3 (2011)
35 Pages Posted: 1 May 2016
Date Written: April 28, 2016
Criticism of Supreme Court confirmation hearings has intensified consider- ably over the past two decades. In particular, there is a growing sense that nominees are now less forthcoming and that the hearings have suffered as a result. In this article, we challenge that conventional wisdom. Based on a comprehensive content analysis of every question and answer in all of the modern confirmation hearings — nearly 11,000 in total — we find only a mild decline in the candor of recent nominees. Moreover, we find that senators ask more probing questions than in the past, and that nominees are now more explicit about their reasons when they choose not to respond — two factors that may be fueling the perception that evasiveness has increased in recent years. We close with a discussion of the normative implications of our findings as well as an outline for future research into this issue.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation