SCOCAblog last week published its detailed 2020 year in review for the Supreme Court. They say, “we update our ongoing search for evidence of partisan behavior on the current California Supreme Court. Such behavior featured prominently in voting patterns in the court’s past, but the current period instead features high consensus rates. We still see no evidence of a [Governor] Brown [appointees] versus senior justices split; in fact, this year’s data strengthens our previous conclusion that no such split exists — so far.” The blog concludes that, unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, “the vast majority of California high court decisions are unanimous, with few 4–3 splits and no clear swing justice.”
And, of course, if you’re looking for regular statistical analyses of the court and its justices, look no further than Kirk Jenkins’s California Supreme Court Review. The most recent offering is “How Often is Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye in the Minority in Civil Cases?”
Related:
The Supreme Court granted review in a lot more than 14 cases in 12 months
Law reviews focus on the Supreme Court, with differing views about court consensus
“California Supreme Court consistently unanimous, even in contentious cases”
The barely perceptible Brown-justices bloc
Justice Werdegar’s replacement might not affect case outcomes much