Two-mode network of votes on the Rehnquist court (Spaeth 1990)

Source: R/data_irps.R

A two-mode network of 376 US Supreme Court cases and the nine justices who sat together on the Rehnquist court between the 1995 and 2004 terms. This was the longest period in the court's history without a change in its membership, which makes the whole run comparable.

A tie indicates that a justice voted with the majority on a case, and is weighted 1 for a full vote with the majority and 0.5 for a partial concurrence.

One nodal attribute is included:

  • term: for cases, the court term in which the case was decided, from 1995 to 2004. This is NA for the justices.

data(irps_supremecourt)

Format

#> -- # Rehnquist Court -----------------------------------------------------------
#> # A labelled, weighted, two-mode network of 376 cases and 9 justices and 2300
#> majority vote ties
#>
#> -- Nodes
#> # A tibble: 385 x 3
#>   label      mode   term
#>   <chr>      <chr> <int>
#> 1 E001_Ada95 cases  1995
#> 2 E002_All95 cases  1995
#> 3 E003_Ari95 cases  1995
#> 4 E004_Asg95 cases  1995
#> 5 E005_Bab95 cases  1995
#> 6 E006_Cal95 cases  1995
#> # i 379 more rows
#>
#> -- Ties
#> # A tibble: 2,300 x 3
#>    from    to weight
#>   <int> <int>  <dbl>
#> 1     1   377      1
#> 2     2   377      1
#> 3     3   377      1
#> 4     4   377      1
#> 5     6   377      1
#> 6     7   377      1
#> # i 2,294 more rows
#>

Source

The UCINET standard dataset collection derives it from the Supreme Court Database.

Details

Cases are labelled by an index and an abbreviation of the case name followed by the two-digit term, so that E001_Ada95 is the first case of the 1995 term. Justice names have been corrected to their standard spelling.

References

Spaeth, Harold J. 1990. United States Supreme Court Judicial Database. Ann Arbor MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. doi:10.3886/icpsr09422

Doreian, Patrick, Paulette Lloyd, and Andrej Mrvar. 2013. "Partitioning large signed two-mode networks: Problems and prospects". Social Networks 35(2): 212-230. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2012.01.002