Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-47pwl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-22T04:32:14.568Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Do Justices Defend the Speech They Hate?

An Analysis of In-Group Bias on the US Supreme Court

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2022

Lee Epstein
Affiliation:
Washington University in St. Louis
Christopher M. Parker*
Affiliation:
University of Rhode Island
Jeffrey A. Segal
Affiliation:
Stony Brook University
*
Contact the corresponding author, Christopher M. Parker, at cmparker@uri.edu.

Abstract

For decades now, experiments have revealed that we humans tend to evaluate the views or activities of our own group and its members more favorably than those of outsiders. To assess convergence between experimental and observational results, we explore whether US Supreme Court justices fall prey to in-group bias in freedom-of-expression cases. A two-level hierarchical model of all votes cast between the 1953 and 2014 terms confirms that they do. Although liberal justices are (overall) more supportive of free-speech claims than conservative justices, the votes of both liberal and conservative justices tend to reflect their preferences toward the speech’s ideological grouping and not solely an underlying taste for (or against) greater protection for expression. These results suggest the importance of new research programs aimed at evaluating how other cognitive biases identified in experimental work may influence judicial behavior in actual court decisions.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2018 by the Law and Courts Organized Section of the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable