Yes. EJR and JEI evaluate these judges from a particular substantive-policy point of view. The fundamental policy premise behind the evaluations is that the extremes of expansion of civil liability in the American courts over recent decades inhibit growth, discourage enterprise, and change for the worse the way we conduct our personal and professional lives. Judge-made law in the state courts has created much of this liability expansion and many of its destructive features. The evaluation assesses a judge's record, in comparison to the records of other judges on this same court, on issues that involve the creation of liability and expansion of liability, or, on the other hand, the restriction or tempering of liability. The evaluation focuses especially on cases where the judges have disagreed with each other or with other courts that have adjudicated the same case, and it compares the voting records of the judges in these cases.