Author ORCID Identifier
Document Type
Thesis
Date of Award
Spring 5-5-2026
Degree Name
Political Science (BA)
Department
POLITICAL SCIENCE
First Advisor
Wendy Martinek
Second Advisor
Daniel Magleby
Third Advisor
Jeffrey Yates
Abstract
This thesis examines whether judicial ideology has a stronger influence on Supreme Court decision making in substantive due process claims when compared to other areas of law through the Roberts Court. Previous scholarship has noted that ideology is a factor in judicial decision making, however, there is little scholarship on if specific areas of law makes ideology play a larger factor in decision making. Utilizing justice-level voting records from the Roberts Court and Segal-Cover scores to measure judicial ideology, a logistic regression model is utilized to analyze the relationship between ideology and voting behavior in substantive due process cases and non-substantive due process cases. The model demonstrates that that the effect of ideology becomes stronger in substantive due process cases when compared to non-substantive due process cases. The findings suggest that ideology plays a larger factor in judicial decision making in substantive due process when compared to non-substantive due process cases.
Recommended Citation
Ginsberg, Nicholas J., "Substantive biases? Analyzing ideological bias in substantive due process claims on the Roberts Court" (2026). Undergraduate Honors Theses. 59.
https://orb.binghamton.edu/undergrad_honors_theses/59
