ABSTRACT
In 1816, the state legislature of New Hampshire took control of Dartmouth College and acted as its new board of trustees because the college was in financial disarray. Dartmouth viewed the takeover as a political move by the newly empowered Democratic-Republicans and sued the state. Indeed, conventional wisdom in judicial politics suggests that oral arguments presented to the Supreme Court generally have no impact on how the justices decide. The Supreme Court is the most powerful and public organ of the US judiciary and, consequently, produces the most observable data to collect and study. The study of oral arguments is poised to make great strides as technological tools become more sophisticated and new data sources become available. Studies have demonstrated that the rate at which justices ask questions during oral argument vary from each other, vary over time, and vary from case to case.
