Wave 28 legal expert descriptives

Wave 28 legal expert background descriptives

Wave 28 legal expert background descriptives

Frequency tables for cat­e­gor­i­cal demo­graph­ic and back­ground variables collected near the end of the Wave 28 expert survey.

Assumptions and exclusions:

  • Percentages are computed among non-missing responses within the eligible group for each item.
  • Item non­re­sponse is omitted from both the displayed rows and the denominator.
  • Free-text detail responses are excluded from generated output artifacts.
  • Multi-select items report the share of eligible respon­dents selecting each option, so per­cent­ages can sum to more than 100%.

Overall legal experts

Legal-expert composition

Legal-expert respon­dents who answered at least one non-consent question (N = 327)

ResponseN%
Law pro­fes­sors19359.0
Elite lawyers11334.6
Article III federal judges216.4

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed within legal experts who answered at least one non-consent question.

Originalism question overall

Legal experts who answered at least one non-consent question and gave a non-missing con­sti­tu­tion­al inter­pre­ta­tion response (N = 248)

ResponseN%
What it means in current times21486.3
What it meant as orig­i­nal­ly written3413.7

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among legal experts who answered at least one non-consent question and answered the orig­i­nal­ism question.

Law professors

Law professors: faculty appointment

Eligible respon­dents: law pro­fes­sors (N = 151)

ResponseN%
Tenure-track or tenured faculty9764.2
Emeritus faculty2617.2
Non-tenure track clinical faculty159.9
Other (e.g., Law Librarian or Administrator with teaching duties)64.0
Legal research and writing (LRW) faculty53.3
Adjunct or part-time instructor21.3

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Law professors: primary field of study

Eligible respon­dents: law pro­fes­sors (N = 151)

ResponseN%
Constitutional law2617.2
Other2617.2
Clinical and expe­ri­en­tial education138.6
Environmental and energy law127.9
Intellectual property and tech­nol­o­gy law117.3
International and com­par­a­tive law96.0
Legal theory and history96.0
Criminal law and procedure85.3
Tax law64.0
Administrative law and regulated industries53.3
Civil procedure and jurisdiction53.3
Contracts and com­mer­cial law53.3
Business and corporate law42.6
Property and real estate42.6
Health law and bioethics32.0
Immigration law32.0
Family and juvenile law21.3

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Law professors: institution type

Eligible respon­dents: law pro­fes­sors (N = 153)

ResponseN%
Public7851.0
Private nonprofit7146.4
None of the above42.6

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Law professors: constitutional interpretation approach

Eligible respon­dents: law pro­fes­sors (N = 142)

ResponseN%
What it means in current times12789.4
What it meant as orig­i­nal­ly written1510.6

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers

Lawyers: currently working in a legal role

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 99)

ResponseN%
Yes7878.8
No2121.2

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers: most recent primary legal role

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 99)

ResponseN%
Private practice attorney6868.7
Other1111.1
Government attorney (non-pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al)77.1
In-house counsel66.1
Public defender or legal aid attorney44.0
Prosecutor / district attorney (federal, state, or local)33.0

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers: primary area of legal practice

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 99)

ResponseN%
Civil and com­mer­cial litigation2727.3
Other2020.2
Constitutional or civil rights law1111.1
Corporate and business law1111.1
Administrative and reg­u­la­to­ry law99.1
Intellectual property66.1
Tax law55.1
Criminal law44.0
Family law44.0
Labor and employ­ment law22.0

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers: years practiced law

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 97)

ResponseN%
0–988.2
10–191414.4
20–291919.6
30–391414.4
40–492828.9
50–5999.3
60+55.2

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers: government legal service experience

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 98)

ResponseN%
Yes, pre­vi­ous­ly5051.0
No4242.9
Yes, currently66.1

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers: constitutional interpretation approach

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers (N = 94)

ResponseN%
What it means in current times7781.9
What it meant as orig­i­nal­ly written1718.1

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges

Federal judges: current judicial status

Eligible respon­dents: federal judges (N = 12)

ResponseN%
Senior judge866.7
Active judge433.3

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges: current or most recent judicial position

Eligible respon­dents: federal judges (N = 13)

ResponseN%
U.S. District Court Judge1292.3
U.S. Court of Appeals Judge17.7

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges: party of nominating president

Eligible respon­dents: federal judges on district or appellate courts (N = 13)

ResponseN%
Democrat753.8
Republican646.2

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges: home-state senator recommendation party

Eligible respon­dents: federal district judges (N = 12)

ResponseN%
Democrat650.0
Both (bipar­ti­san recommendation)433.3
Republican216.7

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges: years on the bench

Eligible respon­dents: non-retired federal judges (N = 12)

ResponseN%
Over 10 years12100.0
Under 10 years00.0

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Federal judges: constitutional interpretation approach

Eligible respon­dents: federal judges (N = 12)

ResponseN%
What it means in current times1083.3
What it meant as orig­i­nal­ly written216.7

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Lawyers and law professors

Lawyers and law professors: high-level prior roles

Eligible respon­dents: lawyers and law pro­fes­sors (N = 401)

ResponseN%
Other high-level position4310.7
Head of Law Firm Appellate or Supreme Court Practice102.5
U.S. Supreme Court Law Clerk82.0
General Counsel / Chief Legal Officer (Fortune 500 or major organization)51.2
U.S. Attorney51.2
State Supreme Court Justice41.0
State Attorney General20.5
State Solicitor General20.5
White House Counsel / Deputy White House Counsel20.5

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among eligible respon­dents; respon­dents may select more than one role.

Political scientists

Political scientists: occupation

Eligible respon­dents: political sci­en­tists (N = 622)

ResponseN%
Full-time faculty55889.7
Emeritus faculty477.6
Adjunct faculty91.4
Other50.8
Post-doctoral fellow30.5

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Political scientists: primary field of study

Eligible respon­dents: political sci­en­tists whose occu­pa­tion was not ‘Other’ (N = 614)

ResponseN%
American politics26142.5
Comparative politics15425.1
International relations11218.2
Political theory477.7
Another field of political science294.7
Something other than political science111.8

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.

Political scientists: institution type

Eligible respon­dents: political sci­en­tists whose occu­pa­tion was not ‘Other’ (N = 612)

ResponseN%
Public35257.5
Private nonprofit25742.0
Private for-profit30.5

Percentages are cal­cu­lat­ed among non-missing responses for that item.