Recusals and the “Problem” of an Equally Divided Supreme Court
Ryan Black and Lee Epstein

Journal of Appellate Practice and Process 7 (1): 75-99 (2005)
Click here for the article
Click here for the data

Abstract
We explore the extent to which discretionary recusals produce an equally divided court. As it turns out (and contrary to some commentary), in only a small fraction of cases in which one justice recuses him or herself (49 out of 599) does a tie result.

We develop this finding in three steps. First, we provide a brief look at the ``problem" of an equally divided Court; next we present our analysis of the results of discretionary recusals. Along these lines, we provide some descriptive data on recusals since the 1946 term, as well as demonstrate that recusals generally do not produce equally divided Courts. We end with a discussion on possible explanations for our results and with suggestions for future research on recusals.

keywords: judicial recusal, U.S. Supreme Court, judicial ethics, conflict of interest, recusal standards, court legitimacy, judicial decision-making, case studies, procedural law, judicial impartiality