Skip to main content
"The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking
Vanderbilt Law Review
  • Tracey E. George
  • Chris Guthrie
Document Type
Publication Date
  • judicial process,
  • decision making,
  • United States Supreme Court,
  • jurisdiction

In this Essay--the first in a series of essays designed to reimagine the Supreme Court--we argue that Congress should authorize the Court to adopt, in whole or part, panel decision making... With respect to the prospect of different Court outcomes, we demonstrate empirically in this Essay that the vast majority of cases decided during the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries--including "Grutter", "Roe", and "Bush v. Gore" --would have come out the same way if the Court had decided them in panels rather than as a full Court.

Citation Information
Tracey E. George and Chris Guthrie. ""The Threes": Re-Imagining Supreme Court Decisionmaking" Vanderbilt Law Review Vol. 61 (2008) p. 1825
Available at: