Modeling Collegial Courts

New from Chuck Cameron and Lewis Kornhauser:

We present a formal game theoretic model of adjudication by a collegial court. Distinctively, the model incorporates dispute resolution as well as judicial policy making and indicates the relationship between the two. It explicitly addresses joins, concurrences and dissents, and assumes judicial rather than legislative or electoral objectives by the actors. The model makes clear predictions about the plurality opinion’s location in policy space; the case’s disposition; and the size and composition of the disposition-coalition, the join-coalition, and the concurrence-coalition. These elements of adjudication equilibrium vary with the identity of the opinion writer and with the location of the case. In general, the opinion is not located at the ideal policy of the median judge. The model suggests new directions for empirical work on judicial politics.

I don’t know this literature that well (though I know enough to respect work done by Chuck Cameron on this topic), but I’m struck by the fact that one can write a model and not refer at some point to the jury theorem. Is this common?