Ginsburg is close, but not quite

[cos]

For the first time ever, a silly OkCupid quiz result on my LJ:

Your result for Which Supreme Court Justice Are You Test...

You are Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

... here's the photo and text from the quiz ...


Take Which Supreme Court Justice Are You Test

The reason I post it here is to say: Close, but not quite. I'm pleased, certainly, that of the current court, it picked Ginsburg for me. She's my current favorite. But this quiz would've done much better with a larger repertoire than just the current court, and then it might've sussed out who I really am: William Brennan.

I started reading opinions of the court in the 1990s, and two Justices in particular struck me, again and again, in a positive and enriching way: Marshall and Brennan.

Thurgood Marshall was the one who showed me new ways of thinking. He was the one whose votes sometimes made me think "wait what?!?!" and then, as I read what he wrote, start to understand how he saw the case, and why it made sense.

Brennan was different. Brennan was the one whose vote I knew before I had to look it up, every time, because I simply had to ask myself, "how would I wish this case decided?" I'd read his opinions for a different reason: they made me think "Yes, this!" long before LiveJournal :) I'd look at the deep examinations of opinions that were essentially my own, and see where they led in greater depth. I'd silently cheer triumphantly, in my head, to see a brilliant new way of explaining some belief of mine, that I'd never have thought of.

With Brennan on the court, I felt like I had a personal representative, like I was on the court without having to do the work.

P.S. Which Justice does this quiz pick for you?

Comments

[badseed1980.livejournal.com]

Apparently, I'm Kennedy (76%). Interesting. Not entirely right, of course. Stevens (72%) and Ginsburg (71%) were my second and third highest.

Things I do like about what they say about Kennedy:

* broad interpretation of the Constitution's free speech protections
* goes against the conservative norm on gay and abortion rights issues

[lil-brown-bat.livejournal.com]

I got Souter (80%). Damfino why really. Ginsburg second at 76%.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

I'm John Paul Stevens! I'm not shocked. :)

[ravenword.livejournal.com]

I'm John Paul Stevens, with 80% agreement. Also got 80% with Souter, and 79% with both Breyer and Ginsburg.

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

I got Souter (84%). Huh. "According to The New York Times, Souter has 'put himself in the camp of jurists who view the Constitution as a flexible set of principles that can evolve.' However, Souter often employs originalist analysis in his opinions; though he often reaches very different conclusions than the Court's conservative wing."

I really like your thing about Brennan. I want an experience like that now. :-)

[theloriest.livejournal.com]

76% John Paul Stevens
75% Ginsberg
67% Breyer

[entirelysonja.livejournal.com]

Stevens 84%
Breyer 83%
Ginsburg 83%

[kiya]

Stevens, at 74%. I like his writeup; I don't know enough about the personalities on the court to say more than that.

I also got 74% on Souter, and 73% on Breyer and Ginsburg.


My low score (29%) is, unsurprisingly, Scalia.

[pikake.livejournal.com]

* 12/100 You scored 21% on Alito, higher than 12% of your peers.
* 16/100 You scored 23% on Scalia, higher than 16% of your peers.
* 18/100 You scored 26% on Thomas, higher than 18% of your peers.
* 10/100 You scored 20% on Roberts, higher than 10% of your peers.
* 18/100 You scored 52% on Kennedy, higher than 18% of your peers.
* 69/100 You scored 72% on Stevens, higher than 69% of your peers.
* 75/100 You scored 72% on Souter, higher than 75% of your peers.
* 64/100 You scored 63% on Breyer, higher than 64% of your peers.
* 72/100 You scored 71% on Ginsburg, higher than 72% of your peers.

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about Brennan. Sadly, I think when you refer to Marshall, you're morel likely referring to the work of Marhsall's clerks. Marhsall's work before he got to the Court makes him on of the true heroes of US history. But he treated the Court as a sinecure, leaving the work to others, as I understand it.

I got Breyer, at 71%, with Stevens, Souter, Kennedy, and Ginsburg all in the 60s. Which goes to show how often, were I on the court, my understanding of what the Constitution allows would differ from what I think is good policy. I would surely rather have Ginsburg's or Stevens' point of view implemented by the other branches of the government.

[goljerp]

I got 84% Stevens, 84% Souter, and 83% Ginsberg. Me, liberal?

[roamin-umpire.livejournal.com]

Interesting. Nothing amazingly high:

Stevens 68%
Ginsburg 67%
Souter 60%
Breyer 58%
Kennedy 56%
Roberts 53%
Alito 50%
Thomas 39%
Scalia 35%

I find it vaguely comforting that seven of the nine justices agree with me at least half the time.

Note to self: Read some Supreme Court opinions.

[rkt.livejournal.com]

some of these, i was trying to remember the actual case, in some cases, it was a rather 'it depends' stance.

i evenly tied for souter and ginsburg (more than 90%), but they're trying to say souter.

apparently, i agree with alito 12% of the time.

[sauergeek.livejournal.com]

I came up Stevens at 84%, though Souter was also 84%. Ginsburg was 83%. I'm not at all surprised by this result, but I'll second you on Brennan.

[noeltheone.livejournal.com]

Sadly, I don't expect to see another Brennan, Marshall, or Black appointed, even by Obama.

And as Nina Totenburg noted a few months ago, Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter, Breyer really would have been considered (and in Stevens and Ginsuburg's case were) moderates on the Brennan court.

They are not really Liberals, except as compared to the increasingly conservative courts we have now.

[chaiya.livejournal.com]

This was a really interesting post, to me. I am apparently 88% in agreement with Ginsburg. On the other end of the spectrum, I'm 14% Alito and 15% Scalia, apparently.

What I want to know is, do you recommend an online resource for someone who's never read a court opinion before, and needs help deciphering it and understanding the context? You've made me curious, but I assume wikipedia isn't enough. :)

[chaiya.livejournal.com]

Also, can you identify which cases were used as examples? I am honestly torn on some of the questions, and would like to see what was written and how things were decided.

[cos]

They actually tend to be fairly readable. There will be some terms that have meanings you're not used to, but you'll notice from context - usually they'll cite some other cases in connection with how they define the terms, and you can read those. Over time, if you read more rulings, you'll notice what they have in common and be better able to interpret all of them. But you can start by just reading one, on some case that interests you, and it will make sense.

[hermitgeecko.livejournal.com]

Anthony Kennedy, I'm afraid. 76% of my answers agreed.