Predicting the Behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States: A General Approach
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Building upon developments in theoretical and applied machine learning, as well as the efforts of various scholars including Guimera and Sales-Pardo (2011), Ruger et al. (2004), and Martin et al. (2004), we construct a model designed to predict the voting behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States. Using the extremely randomized tree method first proposed in Geurts, et al. (2006), a method similar to the random forest approach developed in Breiman (2001), as well as novel feature engineering, we predict more than sixty years of decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States (1953-2013). Using only data available prior to the date of decision, our model correctly identifies 69.7% of the Court's overall affirm and reverse decisions and correctly forecasts 70.9% of the votes of individual justices across 7,700 cases and more than 68,000 justice votes. Our performance is consistent with the general level of prediction offered by prior scholars. However, our model is distinctive as it is the first robust, generalized, and fully predictive model of Supreme Court voting behavior offered to date. Our model predicts six decades of behavior of thirty Justices appointed by thirteen Presidents. With a more sound methodological foundation, our results represent a major advance for the science of quantitative legal prediction and portend a range of other potential applications, such as those described in Katz (2013).
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Jul 2014.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024The Use of Readability Metrics in Legal Text: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 4
- 2023Towards Grammatical Tagging for the Legal Language of Cybersecuritycited by 1
- 2025The Judge Variable: Challenging Judge-Agnostic Legal Judgment Predictioncited by 1
- 2026How Do LLMs Understand Legal Philosophy? Diagnosing Legal-Philosophical Reasoning in LLMscited by 0
- 2026How Do LLMs Understand Legal Philosophy? Diagnosing Legal-Philosophical Reasoning in LLMs14 Oct 2026
- 2025The Judge Variable: Challenging Judge-Agnostic Legal Judgment Prediction18 Jul 2025
- 2024The Use of Readability Metrics in Legal Text: A Systematic Literature Review14 Nov 2024
- 2023Towards Grammatical Tagging for the Legal Language of Cybersecurity29 Jun 2023