ATL Poll Results: Your LEAST Favorite Supreme Court Justice
After finding out your Favorite Supreme Court Justice (answer: Justice Scalia), we asked about your LEAST Favorite Supreme Court justice. And the result was surprising, at least to us.
Voter turnout was massive, with over 6,000 votes cast. Maybe everyone's in a voting frame of mind, with Election Day so close. Here's how you voted:
The "winner": Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, with a whopping 40 percent of ballots cast. Second place went to Justice David H. Souter, with 19 percent of the vote.
Thank you to the voters -- all 6,000 of you. And thanks to everyone who linked to the poll, especially Glenn Reynolds, Ann Althouse, and Jason Harrow (of SCOTUSblog).
We have a few cursory observations on these results, which appear after the jump.
1. We previously predicted that Justice Antonin Scalia, because he's such a polarizing figure, would "win" the Least Favorite Justice prize (just as he won Most Favorite Justice). But we were wrong. Justice Scalia was never in serious contention for this distinction.
2. Early in the poll, Justice Clarence Thomas was in the lead. This was understandable. We say this not because we don't like CT -- nothing could be farther from the truth -- but because we could see how liberals might pick him as their least favorite jurist. They might despise Justice Scalia, but they could give him grudging respect as a writer and thinker. He's funny, he's charismatic, and he's a tiger at oral argument. Justice Thomas, because he's so quiet on the bench, could be more easily dismissed as disengaged or insufficiently intellectual.
3. Then ATL got Instalanched, and everything changed. Within hours, Justice Ginsburg shot into the lead -- where she remained for the rest of the contest. Justice Souter took second, and Justice Thomas, the early leader, wound up third.
4. We're surprised that Justice Ginsburg ran away with this one. Even assuming a right-leaning electorate (thanks to the Instapundit link), why not Justice Souter, who "betrayed" the conservatives who put him on the Court? Or Justice Stevens, another Republican appointee who didn't turn out as expected -- and who refuses to step down from the Court, despite his advancing age? Or Justice Kennedy, the fickle swing voter, who could give the conservatives real control, if only he fell into line?
5. The least disliked justices: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. No surprises here. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito are, of course, the newest members of the Court. As such, they haven't had a chance to piss off everyone yet.
What are your thoughts on these results? Feel free to share them in the comments.
Least Favorite Supreme Court Justice [Instapundit]
Who's your least favorite Supreme Court justice? [Althouse]
Blog Round-Up [SCOTUSblog]
Earlier: ATL Reader Poll: Your LEAST Favorite Supreme Court Justice
(14) 
I voted Souter, but I understand why Ginsburg would be number 1. Her voice is like nails on a chalkboard. It makes me want to strangle a small puppy.
I have heard that RBG is the worst at reading opinions from the bench - that she can put you to sleep. But I doubt that would affect many voters (since how many people have seen her do that).
I went with Thomas, but I'm not surprised how RBG did after the Instapundit link. Many of those readers, as well as the folks from the Volokh Conspiracy, have a seemingly (to me) irrational dislike of her over the other jurists. Perhaps it is her voice.
We don't just hate Thomas because he's quiet at oral argument. His opinions also suck. Oh and putting pubic hair on a coke doesn't score too many points either.
I voted Scalia; at least Thomas is not a bigot.
I think most Court watchers, including many liberals, have been impressed by the quality of Thomas's opinions (especially in complex technical or statutory areas). You could even say "pleasantly surprised" -- because, let's face it, Thomas has the weakest credentials of the Supremes.
Also, Thomas didn't put the pubic hair on the Coke. He (allegedly) asked Anita Hill if SHE placed the pubic hair on HIS Coke.
Why would Court watchers be "pleasantly surprised" by Thomas's opinions? With brilliant clerks and brilliant brethren, what did you expect? Has there ever been a Justice whose opinions were of bad quality?
I'm not at all surprised by the results. It's because the right isn't too fond of the idea of a woman holding a position of power.
I'm as Capitalist (republitarian?) as they come, and I don't detest Ginsburg nearly so much as many others.
While she and Breyer (and AK, and SO) have an unfortunately overreliance on international law and shoddy stats (Roper), they're both intellectually honest. In addition, partially because her daughter's a copyright prof, Ginsburg is surprisingly solid on IP -- in Ebay, she was with Roberts and Scalia in noting that applying the 4-factor test should normally lead to an injunction even with business methods. I disagree with her on a number of areas, and find some of her conclusions based on incredibly faulty premises, but I'm just glad that I don't totally disagree with her.
I note with some irony that I have FAR more antipathy for 2 republican appointees -- Stevens and Souter, neither of whose opinions I find much to like on any matter of substantive importance -- far more than Breyer (on the right side of one of the Bush v. Gore opinions) or Ginsburg.
Granted, RBG should have been the SECOND Ginsburg on SCOTUS after Dougie G's nomination was withdrawn, but I'd take the worst of her and Breyer over the "best" of Souter and Stevens without a second thought.
Anon 9:56 -- Souter's opinions are pretty flabby. He's remarkably unimpressive.
10:30PM: It's overbroad to say conservatives have a problem with ALL powerful women. They'd love to see Edith Jones or Janice Rogers Brown on the Supreme Court (and have no problem with either woman serving on powerful circuit courts).
Justice Souter's opinions are definitely toward the less readable side of the spectrum, even though you'd think that a Supreme Court justice, aided by genius law clerks, would be a decent writer.
Also, some of Blackmun's opinions were pretty bad (and I'm not just talking about Roe).
I put down Thomas, but mostly because of what I've seen him say in public. For instance, he prides himself on the fact that he doesn't read mazines and newspapers. He doesn't want any current knowledge to taint his attempts to look at each case from a purly 18th century perspective.
I also saw a CSPAN interview with him, and a few other justices. They were asked if the conferences ever changed their minds. There were three knods, and one shake: Thomas'. He said that he pretty much had his mind made up on cases before they conferred.
So, you are in the room with some of the (arguably) best legal minds in the country and you RARELY change your mind? I think that's arrogant, insulated and dangerous.
The idea that sexism motivates hostility towards Ginsburg, per anonymous at 10:30, is simply absurd. If you took a straw poll of those who voted against her, as to whom they would like to see nominated to the Supreme Court, you would find that most of those folk would would place several women - Sykes, Brown, Williams, Owen, Clement, etc. - very high on their lists.