What Do They Talk About During Supreme Court Nomination Hearings

SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 BREYER 1994 ROBERTS 2005 ALITO 2006 SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) + SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) + SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) + SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) + SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) + SUPREME QUESTIONS After an extensive confirmation hearing, the Senate will vote on Elena Kagan's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court this week. But what, exactly, did they talk about? A new study has looked at the questions asked to each potential justice since 1939. Mostly, they talk about inconsquential matters, but examining the questions asked over the last 70 years gives insight into the issues that have faced our country and the court. Percent of Hearing Time OTHER 1.9% NATIONAL DEFENSE 0.4% FAVORITE JUDGES 0.4% STANDING / ACCESS TO COURTS 0.6% LABOR 0.7% BANKING AND FINANCE 0.9% STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 0.9% FEDERALISM 1.3% COURT ADMINISTRATION 3.3% GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 3.6% CHATTER 35% CRIMINAL JUSTICE 8.6% JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY 12.4% CIVIL RIGHTS 29.8% Civil Rights Questions in Confirmation Hearings Since 1939 RACIAL GENDER / SEXUAL FREEDOM OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY ABORTION RIGHTS DISCRIMINATION ORIENTATION SPEECH / RELIGION (NON-ABORTION) 12.5% 23.5% DISCRIMINATION 16.1% 14.7% 12.7% FRANKFURTER 1939 JACKSON 1941 HARLAN 1955 WHITTAKER 1957 BRENNAN 1957 STEWART 1959 GOLDBERG 1962 WHITE 1962 FORTAS 1965 MARSHALL 1967 THORNBERRY (W) 1968 FORTAS (W) 1968 HAYNSWORTH (R) 1969 BURGER 1969 BLACKMUN 1970 CARSWELL (R) 1970 REHNQUIST 1971 + POWELL 1971 STEVENS 1975 + O'CONNER 1981 SCALIA 1986 REHNQUIST 1986 KENNEDY 1987 BORK (R) 1987 SOUTER 1990 + + THOMAS 1991 GINSBERG 1993 + BREYER 1994 + ROBERTS 2005 + ALITO 2006 + SOTOMAYOR 2009 Where's Earl Warren? Between 1939 and 1955, some nominees did not appear at their own hearings WITHDRAWN (W) OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES DISCUSSED VOTING RIGHTS (9.1 %), ANTI-GOVERNMENT ACTIVITIES (4.1%). RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (1.6%). REJECTED (R) HANDICAP / DISEASE DISCRIMINATION (1.4% ). AGE DISCRIMINATION (0.5%), AND OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES (11.8%) SOURCE "May It Please the Senate: An Empirical Analysis of the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings of Supreme Court Nominees, 1939-2009." by Paul M. Collins Jr. and Lori A. Ringhand. A collaboration between GOOD and MGMT.design. + + ++ + + + + + e +- + 0+ ) + ) +