I’ve been pillaging the Supreme Court’s website in search of PDFs that I can archive for future reference. Using the Court’s website and the wayback machine, I’ve collected the following packs. Note that OT09 selections are necessarily incomplete because the term is technically ongoing.

I’ve included the sets individually below, but brave souls may wish to download all of them together here (640mb).

Bound Volumes
A PDF version of the US Reports volumes.
Volumes 502-548
OT91-OT05

Slip Lists
These slip lists are 1-2 sentence summaries of opinions that can be found on the Court’s website here.
OT99-OT09

Court Calendar
The Court’s calendar.
OT02-OT10

Granted/Noted Case List
A list of the cases scheduled for oral argument and full briefing every term.
OT03-OT09

Hearing Lists
A list of the cases heard each month and the attorneys arguing those cases.
OT04-OT09 (including OT02 and OT99 incomplete)

Journals
The Supreme Court’s annual journal, including statistics and a detailed account of action taken in almost every case.
OT93-OT08

Opinions
(excludes bench opinions and opinions related to orders).
OT02-OT09 (OT99-OT01 incomplete)

Oral Argument Transcripts
OT00-OT09

Orders Lists
OT03-OT09 (note that there will probably be additional orders issued during OT09)

SCOTUSblog Stat Pack
A compilation of SCOTUSblog’s stat packs, which can also be found on SCOTUSwiki here.
OT95-OT09

Guide for Counsel in Cases to be Argued
OT02-OT07, OT09

Rules
1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010 Revisions (including supporting memorandum where available)

Here is the final Term Index for October Term 2009.

OT09_term_index_final

Updated
Most of you know that the Court hears cases during two-week sessions every month from October to April. During most sessions, the Court will hear 8-12 cases and majority opinion assignments are distributed equally for each session. In other words, if there are nine cases for the October session, each justice will write one majority opinion. If there are eleven cases, seven justices will write one opinion and two will be assigned double duty.

This pattern holds true with surprising frequency. Oddly enough, there were two months during OT 09 where the Court didn’t follow its usual opinion distribution. During November, when the Court heard eleven cases, Justice Stevens did not author any majority opinions.

During December, when the Court heard nine opinions, Justice Kennedy did not author any majority opinions and Justice Ginsburg authored two.

There are strategic reasons for this anomaly. One scenario occurs when the Court hears only 9 cases and one justice is integral to bringing a majority together in two cases. For example, if Justice Kennedy was the decisive vote in two 5-4 majority and the senior justices in both (perhaps even the same justice) determines that it is important for Justice Kennedy to author both, there would likely be no interference from the other members of the Court.

Unfortunately, that scenario isn’t likely to have played out here. In November, there were five 9-0 or 8-0 opinions and Justice Stevens joined four of them in full. Two of the ones that Justice Stevens joined in full – Beard v. Kindler and Kucana v. Holder – were written by authors who had already been given another assignment for the month. At least in theory, either case could have been given to Justice Stevens without impacting the lineup of the unanimous decision. Justice Stevens dissented in only two cases out of the nine decided during November.

During December, Justice Ginsburg had two majority opinions and Justice Kennedy had none. Justice Kennedy dissented in an unusually high number opinions that month – four out of nine – but there were several instances where he joined a majority opinion in full. In Florida v. Powell, for example, Justice Kennedy joined Justice Ginsburg 7-2 majority opinion and could have authored the majority to give each justice exactly one majority opinion for the month.

The odd distribution from the November and December compounded to create an imbalance going into the holiday season. That imbalanced lasted throughout the term, as you can see in the chart below.

Compare that to the distribution after December and the total distribution for OT 08. [I've included Citizens United as a OT08 case]

There are a variety of conspiracy theories about why an aberration like this could occur. During OT99, for example, Justice Stevens didn’t author any opinions from the April session because – as the story goes – he lost the majority in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale to Chief Justice Rehnquist when Justice Kennedy flipped sides while opinions were being drafted. If that happened here, it might explain why Justice Kennedy didn’t author any opinions in December. Honestly though, from the set of cases in November and December, I can’t see where that would have happened. The fact that Justice Kennedy didn’t author any opinions in December also tells me that the court already knew something was awry when it distributed opinions for that month. My guess is that the December distribution was a reaction to something that had happened after the Court’s last conference in November.

The obvious reason, and the one discussed by Tom Goldstein here, is that Justice Stevens lost the majority opinion to Justice Kennedy somewhere in the drafting process. The fact that Justice Stevens’ concurring opinion reads like a majority opinion supports this theory.

At the beginning of Section I of his opinion, Justice Stevens writes:

Although the Court provides a brief statement of facts, a more complete explication may be useful for those unfamiliar with petitioners’ patent application and this case’s procedural history.

That seems like a convenient excuse to use the same statement of facts that was originally drafted for Section I of the majority opinion.

Term Index
Vote Breakdown
Vote Breakdown Stats

—

You can see from the Term Index that Justice Stevens is the most likely author of the majority opinion in Bilski.

Starting this week, I’ll be posting my updated charts on SCOTUSblog. You can find the first SB version of my charts here.

More specifically:

Case List
Condensed Case List (formerly the Term Index)
Vote Breakdown
Vote Breakdown Data

The Supreme Court released three new opinions today and dismissed one hotly-anticipated case as improvidently granted.

Graham v. Florida- Held: The [Cruel and Unusual Punishment] Clause does not permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison without parole for a nonhomicide crime.

Abbott v. Abbott- Held: A parent has a right of custody under the [Hague] Convention by reason of that parent’s ne exeat right.

United States v. Comstock- Held: The Necessary and Proper Clause grants Congress authority sufficient to enact [civil-commitment statutes for sexually dangerous prisoners].

Sullivan v. Florida- Dismissed as Improvidently Granted

I’ve posted new term statistics. Enjoy!

Term Index
Voting Breakdown
Opinion Breakdown

There are two Green Bag Bobblehead dolls on eBay right now – Justice Scalia and Justice O’Connor – available from a Chicago, IL seller named “eileenwepstein2010“.

Is it her? Hard to say…

[Update: No, not hard to say. It's actually Richard Epstein's wife. Whoops?]

I’ve updated the Term Statistics to reflect this week’s opinions.

Complete
—
Term Index
Opinion Breakdown
Vote Breakdown

I’m sad to see Justice Stevens leave the Court for a variety of reasons that have been well documented by people smarter than me. I’m also excited to some change on the Court because the liberal wing needs a change of pace after it’s dismal performance thus far in OT09.

The biggest problem, at least for me, is that with any new Justice comes a slew of recusals. New justices that come from circuit courts have an even higher recusal rate than other justices. The biggest problem with recusals is not the impact they have on the Court, but the impact they have on my term statistics. You cannot imagine how frustrating it is to have 5-3, 6-2, 7-1, or 8-0 opinions.

Unfortunately for me, President Obama probably won’t take my concerns very seriously and is likely to appoint someone who will spark a slew of recusals. Tom Goldstein correctly noted that General Kagan would not spark as many recusals as some commentators have mentioned, but there are still at least 5 recusals from her alone. Judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland would likely recuse themselves from many cases coming from their circuits. Judge Wood’s circuit, the Seventh Circuit, is the circuit that contributes the second greatest number of cases to the Supreme Court’s docket while Judge Garland’s circuit, the DC circuit, contributes relatively few every year.

I’ve updated the term statistics and you can find the new versions of each chart below:

Complete (includes all three charts)
—
Term Index
Opinion Breakdown
Vote Breakdown