A vote by a majority is not required in such cases. Even if two or three of the justices are strongly of the opinion that certiorari should be allowed, frequently the other justices will acquiesce in their view but the petition is always granted if four so vote. The work of passing upon these applications for certiorari is laborious but the court is able to perform it adequately. Observations have been made as to the vast number of pages of records and briefs that are submitted in the course of a term. The total is imposing, but the suggested conclusion is hasty and rests on an illusory basis.
Records are replete with testimony and evidence of facts.
But the questions on certiorari are questions of law. So many cases turn on the facts, principles of law not being in controversy. It is only when the facts are so interwoven with the questions of law which we should review that the evidence must be examined and then only to the extent that it is necessary to decide the questions of law. I think it safe to say that about 60 per cent of the applications for certiorari are wholly without merit and ought never to have been made. There are probably about 20 per cent or so in addition which have a fair degree of plausibility but which fail to survive critical examination.