for salient opinion assignments notwithstanding both his seniority and

his shared ideology with the Chief. Justice Alito is significantly junior

to Justice Scalia, who has served on the Court twenty years longer

than Justice Alito,158 yet the two Justices have received precisely the

same number of salient opinion assignments — eleven. Their percentages

of salient opinion assignments compared to non-salient assignments

are essentially the same (15% for Justice Scalia and 16% for Justice

Alito) and their percentages of salient assignments compared to

assigning opportunities are also the same (15%)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165674)

most obvious is that the Chief has greater confidence that Justice Alito

will write the kind of opinion that the Chief prefers in the most important

cases, either in substance or in style. The Chief, for instance,

has expressed a general preference for narrower rather than broader

rulings,161 while Justice Scalia has in his own opinions ridiculed the

Chief for what Justice Scalia describes as “faux judicial restraint.”162

Justice Alito has also displayed a willingness, unlike Justice Scalia, to

carve the more middle-ground, less absolute positions that the Chief

favors.163

http://cdn.harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/vol129_Lazarus.pdf

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165679)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165688)

"The third inference that can be drawn is that the Chief feels a

heightened need to assign salient cases to Justice Kennedy. The Chief

assigns cases to Justice Kennedy at a rate far higher than to anyone

but himself, even though Justice Kennedy does not need the Chief to

assign him salient cases to ensure that he receives such high-profile assignments:

Justice Kennedy is the member of the Court who is most

frequently the most senior Justice in the majority in salient cases in

which the Chief is in dissent,166 and therefore Justice Kennedy, more

than any other Associate Justice on the bench, can (and does) selfassign

the writing of the opinions in those cases.167 The most likely

explanation is that many of the salient cases in which the Chief and

Justice Kennedy are together in the majority are closely divided cases

in which Justice Kennedy is the “swing” vote.1"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165693)

glad to see the author has at least a Time Magazine-level understanding of the "ideologies" of the justices

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165696)

The judicial statistics suggest that Chief Justice Roberts has the

same proclivity toward institutional messaging through opinion assignments.

Not just in closely divided cases,216 but more broadly, the

Chief regularly assigns opinions to “liberal” Justices in cases in which

the public might consider the outcome “conservative” and to “conservative”

Justices in cases in which the public might consider the outcome

“liberal.” For example, Justice Stevens wrote the Court opinions

upholding voter identification laws217 and rejecting altogether a claim

for damages against Shell for hazardous waste contamination;

Justice Ginsburg

wrote the opinion overturning a lower court ruling in favor of environmentalists

suing power plants for contributing to climate change;220

and Justice Breyer authored the opinion limiting a tobacco company’s

liability for punitive damages to a smoker who died of lung cancer.221

On the other side of the ledger, the Chief Justice assigned himself

the opinions upholding state campaign finance limitations on judicial

candidates,222 rejecting prosecutors’ claim that police may search the

digital information on a cell phone without a warrant,223 and, of

course, preserving the viability of President Obama’s Affordable Care

Act by allowing federal subsidies to extend to states with federal insurance

exchanges;224 Justice Scalia wrote the opinions for the Court

overturning a conviction based on the admission of evidence obtained

from a GPS device without a warrant,225 and in favor of an employee’s

claim of discrimination based on disparate treatment;226 and Justice

Alito wrote the Court’s opinion in favor of a Muslim inmate’s right to

grow a beard in accordance with his religious beliefs.227

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165697)

""The third inference that can be drawn is that the Chief feels a

heightened need to assign salient cases to Justice Kennedy. The Chief

assigns cases to Justice Kennedy at a rate far higher than to anyone

but himself, even though Justice Kennedy does not need the Chief to

assign him salient cases to ensure that he receives such high-profile assignments:

Justice Kennedy is the member of the Court who is most

frequently the most senior Justice in the majority in salient cases in

which the Chief is in dissent,166 and therefore Justice Kennedy, more

than any other Associate Justice on the bench, can (and does) selfassign

the writing of the opinions in those cases.167 The most likely

explanation is that many of the salient cases in which the Chief and

Justice Kennedy are together in the majority are closely divided cases

in which Justice Kennedy is the “swing” vote.1"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042701&forum_id=2#29165715)