Premium
Justices and Legal Clarity: Analyzing the Complexity of U . S . Supreme Court Opinions
Author(s) -
Owens Ryan J.,
Wedeking Justin P.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
law and society review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.867
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1540-5893
pISSN - 0023-9216
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00464.x
Subject(s) - clarity , supreme court , law , ambiguity , ideology , political science , economic justice , concurring opinion , dissenting opinion , confrontation clause , roberts court , craft , sociology , certiorari , politics , history , computer science , original jurisdiction , programming language , biochemistry , chemistry , archaeology
Legal clarity is important to understand and measure because of its connection to the rule of law. We provide the first systematic examination of the clarity of S upreme C ourt opinions and discover five important results. First, certain justices systematically craft clearer opinions than others. J ustices S calia and B reyer write the clearest opinions, while J ustice G insburg consistently writes the most complex opinions. Second, ideology does not predict clarity in majority or concurring opinions. Third, all justices write clearer dissents than majority opinions, while minimum winning coalitions produce the clearest majority opinions. Fourth, justices across the board write clearer opinions in criminal procedure cases than in any other issue area. Finally, opinions that formally alter C ourt precedent render less clear law, potentially leading to a cycle of legal ambiguity.