Martin, along with Kevin Quinn of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law developed scores that place Supreme Court justices within an ideological framework, allowing them to be compared across time and sessions. The most recent session saw justices agreeing narrowly on more issues than average, possibly owing to the eight-member court that presided for most of the term.

“Having eight was unusual and awkward,” said Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. “That probably required having a lot more discussion of some things and more compromise and maybe narrower opinions than we would have issued otherwise.”

Read the full article in the New York Times.