Tomorrow — Monday, June 28, 2010 — will be a day that will live in SCOTUS fame for quite some time. At 10 a.m., the Supreme Court will hand down the remaining opinions in Bilski v. Kappos, Free Enterprise Fund and Beckstead and Watts, LLP v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, and, most importantly, McDonald v. City of Chicago. Across the street at 12:30 p.m., Elena Kagan will begin her confirmation hearing. Supreme Court overload!
In this post, we provide final predictions for those four huge cases. Additionally, we will provide an overview of how accurate FantasySCOTUS predictions were for the cases decided in June, including Stop The Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, City of Ontario v. Quon, New Process Steel v. National Labor Relations Board, and Doe v. Reed.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: The Final Countdown and Final Predictions”
The Supreme Court is headed down the home stretch. Of the 86 cases argued during the October 2009 term, 59 have been decided and only 27 are remaining.
While we are still waiting for results the biggest cases of the term, including McDonald v. Chicago, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, and Doe v. Reed, the Supreme Court handed down several significant cases in May: American Needle v. NFL, Graham v. Florida, Carr v. United States, Berghuis v. Thompkins, United States v. Comstock, and Levin v. Commerce Energy.
In this post, we will revisit our predictions and compare them to the outcomes. We will use our standard measures to explain how confident we were of our decisions, and how accurate our forecasts were.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Revisiting American Needle, Graham v. Florida, Comstock, and Berghuis”
With Kagan’s nomination set, and all oral arguments for the October 2009 Term completed, we are still waiting for some major decisions — specifically, McDonald v. Chicago, Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, Free Enterprise v. PCAOB, Bilski v. Kappos, and Doe v. Reed. In this post, we will offer predictions for these huge cases. Additionally, our statistics might also give us an insight into what is causing the delay within the SCOTUS on handing down these opinions.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: What’s Taking Them So Long? Predictions for McDonald, CLS, PCAOB, Doe, and Bilksi”
Need a SCOTUS diversion from the Kagan-Palooza? Look no further (although we will note that FantasySCOTUS.net correctly predicted Kagan would get the nod from the very beginning).
The Supreme Court decided several important cases during the month of April, and in this post we will consider them, and see how accurate the league was in predicting those cases. We take a look at United States v. Stevens, Perdue, Merck Co., Stolt Nielsen, and Salazar v. Buono. While our members did not predict that vandals would reverse the Supreme Court’s opinion in Salazar by stealing the memorial cross, these diverse cases help to explain user perceptions of these issues, and in what circumstances predictions are less precise.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Enough About Kagan! What about the cases?”
Who will replace Justice John Paul Stevens? While pundits, savants, and oracles across the SCOTUSphere pontificate and read Article III tea leaves, FantasySCOTUS.net conducted extensive and detailed polling to predict the next Justice. We have invited our nearly 5,000 members – who represent some of the closest and most ardent Court watchers – to weigh in on the vacancy, rank the candidates on the short list, and give their views on the potential nominees. We are still collecting data.
This is the third in a series of posts breaking down this data, as we attempt to add some certainty to the vast amounts of uncertainty emanating from the penumbras of the upcoming vacancy.
This week, we pit Elena Kagan, Diane Wood, and Merrick Garland in a head-to-head-to-head confirmation death match…
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS Predictions of the Next Justice: Team Kagan v. Team Wood v. Team Garland”
Who will replace Justice John Paul Stevens? While pundits, savants, and oracles across the SCOTUSphere pontificate and read Article III tea leaves, FantasySCOTUS.net conducted extensive and detailed polling to predict the next Justice. We have invited our nearly 5,000 members –- who represent some of the closest and most ardent Court watchers -– to weigh in on the vacancy, rank the candidates on the short list, and give their views on the potential
nominees.
This is the second in a series of posts breaking down this data, as we attempt to add some certainty to the vast amounts of uncertainty emanating from the penumbras of the
upcoming vacancy.
Are Elena Kagan’s liberal bona fides established, or would Diane Wood be the better progressive pick? Glenn Greenwald, among others on the left, have written sharply that Kagan is not a proper progressive pick. Others on the left have rushed to Kagan’s defense, and Greenwald has replied in kind.
In this installment, we break down the picks based on self-identified ideologies: liberals, moderates, conservatives, and libertarians…
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: What Do Liberals, Conservatives, Moderates, and Libertarians Think of the SCOTUS Short List?”
Who will replace Justice John Paul Stevens? While pundits, savants, and oracles across the SCOTUSphere pontificate and read Article III tea leaves, FantasySCOTUS.net conducted extensive and detailed polling to predict the next Justice. We have invited our nearly 5,000 members–who represent some of the closest and most ardent Court watchers–to weigh in on the vacancy, rank the candidates on the short list, and give their views on the potential nominees.
(We are still collecting data. Sign up for free at www.fantasyscotus.net and voice your opinion.)
This is the first in a series of posts breaking down his data, as we attempt to add some certainty to the vast amounts of uncertainty emanating from the penumbras of the upcoming vacancy…
Continue reading “Fantasy SCOTUS: Predictions for Justice Stevens’s Replacement”
In this week’s 10th Justice, we consider how predictions for cases are spread out over time, both before and after oral arguments, and how the statistics for the sets differ throughout the lifecycle of a case.
In this context, we will discuss three different cases: Bilski v. Kappos, Alabama v. North Carolina, and McDonald v. City of Chicago. Although these cases have slightly different characteristics, timing in the term, and total number of predictions, the three cases serve as examples of different interest level strata.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Comparing Predictions from Cert Grant to Decision Day”
The Supreme Court has yet to decide 56 cases for the October 2009 term. In this installment, we provide predictions for Bilski v. Kappos, American Needle Inc. v. NFL, Free Enterprise Fund and Beckstead and Watts, LLP v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, Black v. United States, and Graham v. Florida.
American Needle considers whether the National Football League, its teams, and their licensing agent’s function as a single entity for purposes of the Sherman Act. A majority, 60% of the members of the league are predicting an affirmance of the lower court, at a 95% confidence. The SMRs show a tendency for the liberal justices to join with the conservatives in this decision, with Sotomayor most likely to join in the majority.
Stop the Beach considers the limits on state authority to restore storm-eroded beaches or lakefronts. Eighty-four percent of the members of the league are predicting that the Supreme Court affirms the Florida Supreme Court. In this case, the SMRs show that there is a strong potential for a conservative objection to the majority position, with Thomas possibly being the most vocal objection. This is not a big surprise in light of Justice Thomas’ staunch defense of property rights. The liberal justices are really strong for this case. Though Stevens’ low SMR is due to the fact he has already recused himself from this decision. Though, not everyone has followed this news, and some have cast votes for Stevens.
Predictions for PCAOB, Black, Graham, and Bilski, at JoshBlackman.com.
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
In this week’s column we will dig deeper, and figure out exactly how many people cheated on predictions, and whether this cheating had any impact on the results. Additionally, we will revisit five cases recently decided: Johnson v. US, Bloate v. US, Reed Elsevier v. Muchnick, Milavetz, and Mac’s Shell Service v. Shell Oil.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS.net: Counting the Cheaters and Reviewing Recent Cases”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
Tom Goldstein predicted Justice Stevens will retire at the end of the term. He’s getting his own sitcom, so it must be true And in honor of Stevens’ looming retirement and the attendant circus, this week’s installment of the 10th Justice will consider Stevens’ behavior in the 14 cases that have been decided this term. We will show how users perceive Justice John Paul Stevens.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS.net: The Influence of (soon to be retiring?) Justice John Paul Stevens”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
In the four months since I launched FantasySCOTUS.net, nearly 4,000 people have signed up, and made nearly 8,000 predictions for the 81 cases currently pending before the Supreme Court. When designing the system, I decided to allow people to make predictions up until the moment a case is decided by the Supreme Court. On days when opinions are handed down, I lock down the voting once I see that the Court has issued an opinion for a specific case. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court announced Maryland v. Shatzer at 10:00 a.m. I did not lock down the votes until around 11:30 a.m. In this period, several members changed their votes to get more points.
Really? Cheating on a Fantasy League with no cash prizes? What would motivate someone to do this? And what should I do about it?
Continue reading “Fantasy Ethics: Cheating on FantasySCOTUS?”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
Is the Supreme Court partisan? Although many perceive the Justices as mere political aids, do the numbers support this assertion? In this installment of 10th Justice, we will be exploring the perception that the Supreme Court Justices make their decisions based on partisan identity. For this purpose, we will be using a standardized majority ratio technique and confidence intervals to analyze Union Pacific Railroad, Salazar, Christian Legal Society, and McDonald.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Testing the Partisan Waters”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
In this installment, we will consider which Justices will be found in the majority and which ones will be in the minority. Using the results from Citizens United, we will consider four of the biggest pending cases for this term, Quon, Christian Legal Society, McDonald, and Comstock, to show how predictions sort the Justices into majority and minority votes.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: The Majority Shall Reign Supreme”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
How large of a crowd do we need before the crowd becomes “wise”? In this week’s 10th Justice, we will be check how accurate our members predicted five cases recently handed down: Smith v. Spisak, Power Marketing, LLC v. Maine Pub. Util. Comm’n, Kucana v. Holder, South Carolina v. North Carolina, and Wood v. Allen. While these cases are not among the most important cases of the term, they still contribute important data points to test the predictive capabilities of FantasySCOTUS.net, and enables us to further understand the wisdom (and limitations) of our crowd of users. For a refresher on confidence intervals and margins of error in FantasySCOTUS.net predictions, check out last week’s column.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Testing the Wisdom of the Crowds”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
How many SCOTUS watchers does it take to accurately predict the outcome of a case? How large of a crowd do we need before the crowd becomes “wise”? The wisdom of the crowds considers the accuracy of the collective opinion of a group, which in many cases may be more reliable than the opinion of experts. In this column, the 10th Justice tests the theory of the wisdom of the crowds. Based on the accuracy of our predictions in Citizens United v. FEC, the landmark campaign finance reform case, we will develop levels of confidence to determine how reliable our predictions are for four of the most significant cases this term.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS Predictions of the 10th Justice: How wise are the crowds?”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
Yesterday the Supreme Court handed down Citizens United v. FEC, one of the most anticipated cases of the year. The Hillary Movie case was a showdown between free speech and campaign finance laws. In 2008, the D.C. Circuit ruled in favor of the FEC that Hillary: The Movie could not be shown on television right before the 2008 Democratic primaries under the McCain-Feingold Act. SCOTUSBlog has a fantastic round-up of coverage of this landmark case, which will send shock waves through the 2010 election season.
This is the first blockbuster case of the term, and the first real yardstick for the accuracy of the wisdom of the crowds. Were our 3,500 members able to accurately predict this outcome? How valid is the wisdom of our crowds?
On November 20, 2009, based on 286 predictions, 67% of our members predicted that the Supreme Court would reverse the lower court. Of these 286 predictions, 136 members predicted that the outcome would be a 5-4 reversal. This constituted 70% of all reversal predictions.
But since November, the league acquired over 2,000 new members, who made 600 additional predictions for this case. How did they do? And how did these predictions compare to the Supreme Court’s final opinion?
Also, we update the FantasySCOTUS.net leaderboard. Who is in the top 10?
Read on.
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
Welcome to the sixth installment of Predictions of the 10th Justice, brought to you by FantasySCOTUS.net. The league has over 3,400 members, who have made predictions on all cases currently pending before the Supreme Court.
By conducting a rigorous statistical analysis of 26 of the most hotly contested cases this Term, we have developed a descriptive model to elucidate how frequently a Justice will vote in the majority, and how this affects the building of majority coalitions on the Court. Additionally, these statistics paint a picture of how Justice Sotomayor, the newest addition to the Court, will vote, and which coalitions she will join. Finally, this analysis aims to answer the elusive question of how often Justice Kennedy will be in the majority.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS Predictions of the 10th Justice: Predicting Justices in the Majority and Probable Coalitions”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the “hottest new fantasy-league game.”
One of the most anticipated cases before the Supreme Court this term is McDonald v. Chicago. McDonald considers whether Chicago’s handgun ban violates the Second Amendment. While District of Columbia v. Heller established that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms from infringement by the federal government, McDonald changes the target to the states.
McDonald pits the right to keep and bear arms against the rights of the states to enact gun control laws. Which argument has more firepower?
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: McDonald v. Chicago (Chicago Handgun Ban Case)”
Ed. note: ATL has teamed up with the 10th Justice to predict how the Supreme Court may decide upcoming cases. CNN has called FantasySCOTUS the ” hottest new fantasy-league game.”
Hillary: The Movie did not have much impact at the box office, but it’s become quite a hit at One First Street. It’s so popular there that SCOTUS brought it back for a second showing, ordering a re-argument in the campaign finance case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
The Hillary Movie case is a showdown between free speech and campaign finance laws. In 2008, the D.C. Circuit ruled in favor of the FEC that Hillary: The Movie could not be shown on television right before the 2008 Democratic primaries under the McCain-Feingold Act.
Some have suggested that the case could bring down McCain-Feingold. The voters at Fantasy SCOTUS believe Justice Kennedy will swing to deliver the blow that will take it down.
Continue reading “FantasySCOTUS: Citizens United v. FEC (a.k.a. The Hillary Movie Case) Revisited”
