ABSTRACT
The Court's opinions have a uniquely powerful effect on reading, writing, and thinking habits across the legal profession, including on law students of the future, advocates, clerks, and justices. This chapter considers two high-profile accounts of the same term studied by this book: one from the Harvard Law Review, the other from the online SCOTUSblog. It addresses in more detail the motivation and methods for studying the term's opinions as a single, albeit multiauthored, text. The acclaimed SCOTUSblog has offered similar quantitative digests of the Court's annual work for more than a decade. The chapter also considers the limitations of these term-wide overviews and their relation to the wordsmith's fallacy. Launched in 2002, the award-winning SCOTUSblog vies with the Harvard Law Review for the title of highest-profile, most authoritative coverage of the Supreme Court. The blog is an essential resource for anyone researching a particular case.
