{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019473081328751432, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001145475372279496, 'mean_word_length': 5.027586206896552, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Second Mr. Justice Harlan: His Principles of Judicial Decision Making

The aim of this article is to reconstruct he frame of reference for judicial decision making utilized by one particularly articulate Justice of the Supreme Court, the second Mr. Justice Harlan. Like almost all who reached his judicial eminence, he never published in any one place an expression of his personal judicial philosophy. Nevertheless, he was deeply committed to legal norms or principles which he believed should guide a judge in rendering decisions. These basic, firmly held convictions, these judicial principles, must be gleaned from his many opinions and other published writings.' Harlan certainly rejected the Realist contention that judges are not bound by any legal rules or principles.2 Although he was a firm believer in judicial restraint, he felt that his decisions were con-