← Back to scans

Will Amul Tharpar become the next Justice on the Supreme Court? — Amul Thapar

KXSCOURT-29-AT · Politics · 2026-04-15
9%
Agent
11%
Market Price
-2.0%
Edge
45%
Confidence
Volume: 38,018
Spread: 2.3c
Days to resolution: 1012
Markets in event: 34
Final Rationale
My independent estimate of 6% was based on the conditional chain: ~78% vacancy probability × ~10% nomination probability (given red list designation and prior non-selection in 2018) × ~82% confirmation probability. I ACCEPT the Devil's Advocate's critique that the ensemble showed zero spread (a genuine flaw), that the confirmation probability should be higher (~90% given that nomination itself signals commitment), and that the red list may be overweighted without knowing its substance. I PARTIALLY ACCEPT the market signal at 11% — the market has high depth (17,805 contracts) and has been declining from 19% toward my estimate, suggesting informed participants are updating downward. However, the market likely incorporates information from the Oct 2025-Apr 2026 evidence gap and may better price Thapar's diversity appeal and shortlist persistence. I settle at 9%, splitting the difference but leaning toward my evidence-based assessment that the red list and prior non-selection are meaningful negative signals that the market may be underweighting.
Price vs. prediction
How the market moved after the agent's call. Solid blue line is the actual market price; dashed line is the agent's static forecast at $t{=}0$.
$n = 58$ follow-ups
1. Planner Opus · Fermi decomposition + tool plan
Tools chosen: kalshi_data kalshi_orderbook article_search web_search wikipedia_lookup code_execution
Sub-questions (Fermi decomposition)
  1. Will there be a Supreme Court vacancy that needs to be filled before January 20, 2029? (w=0.35)
  2. If a Supreme Court vacancy opens, will Trump nominate Amul Thapar to fill it? (w=0.35)
  3. If Thapar is nominated, will the Senate confirm him before January 20, 2029? (w=0.30)
Planner reasoning
This question resolves YES only if Amul Thapar is the FIRST person confirmed to the Supreme Court in Trump's second term before Jan 20, 2029. This creates a three-stage conditional: (1) a vacancy must open, (2) Thapar must be chosen over other shortlist candidates, and (3) he must be confirmed by the Senate. **Vacancy probability**: Trump's second term (2025-2029) has ~1012 days remaining as of today. Historical base rates suggest ~65-75% chance of at least one vacancy in any given presidential term. Key justices at risk: Thomas (age 77), Alito (age 75) — both might strategically retire under a Republican president, and Sotomayor (age 71, health concerns). **Thapar selection probability**: Thapar (6th Circuit) is well-known as a conservative favorite and has been on Trump shortlists. However, he faces competition from many highly credentialed Federalist Society judges. If a vacancy opens, Thapar might have ~15-25% chance of being the chosen nominee. The question also requires he be the FIRST confirmation, which is a binding constraint. **Confirmation probability**: Given Republican Senate majority (53-47), confirmation is likely if nominated (~85-90%). **Temporal dynamics**: For YES to occur, a justice would need to announce retirement or death, Trump would need to nominate Thapar specifically, and the Senate would need to confirm — all before Jan 20, 2029. The window is roughly 2.75 years, which is substantial but not guaranteed. **Overall estimate**: P(vacancy) × P(Thapar nominated | vacancy) × P(confirmed | nominated) ≈ 0.70 × 0.20 × 0.87 ≈ 12%. The market price from Kalshi will be the key anchor for calibration.
2. Research Parallel tool calls · legacy v2
ToolStatusTimeItemsSummary
kalshi_data OK 2.5s -
kalshi_orderbook OK 0.2s -
article_search OK 0.3s -
web_search OK 55.8s -
wikipedia_lookup OK 2.4s -
code_execution OK 0.0s -
3. Evidence Synthesis Sonnet · 12 items · legacy v2
#StrengthCredibilityDirectionSourceClaimPriced In
1 STRONG 72 ↑ UP kalshi_data Kalshi market 'KXSCOTUSRESIGN-29-CT' prices Clarence Thomas resigning during Trump's term at 57%, up 13% in 7 days and up 6% in 30 days, suggesting elevated vacancy probability. Yes
2 MODERATE 70 ↑ UP code_execution Historical base rate analysis shows 8 of last 12 presidential terms had at least one Supreme Court vacancy, yielding a 66.7% base rate probability. Yes
3 MODERATE 65 NEUTRAL kalshi_data Kalshi market 'KXSCOTUSPOWER-29-29JAN20-R0-0' (Not nine justices at end of Trump term) is priced at only 11%, suggesting the market does NOT expect a net change in court size, though a vacancy could still be filled. Yes
4 MODERATE 60 ↑ UP web_search Key justices at elevated retirement risk include Thomas (age 77), Alito (age 75), and Sotomayor (age 71 with health concerns), all of whom might strategically time departures. Yes
5 STRONG 68 ↓ DOWN web_search A judicial vetting coalition has designated Thapar as a 'red list' candidate (as opposed to 'green list'), indicating serious concerns among some conservative groups that make him potentially 'untenable' compared to preferred alternatives. No
6 MODERATE 65 ↑ UP web_search Thapar is confirmed to be on Trump's 2025 shortlist for Supreme Court nominations, described as 'no surprise' given his prior shortlist appearances, and highlighted as a leading Asian-American candidate. Yes
7 MODERATE 75 ↓ DOWN web_search Thapar was one of six judges personally interviewed by Trump for the Kennedy vacancy in 2018, but was ultimately not selected — Kavanaugh was chosen instead — suggesting a pattern of shortlist inclusion without selection. Yes
8 WEAK 50 ↑ UP web_search Thapar is noted as historically significant (first South Asian Article III judge), and the 'first Asian-American justice' narrative could give him a marginal political advantage over comparably qualified competitors. Yes
9 STRONG 72 NEUTRAL kalshi_data The Kalshi KXSCOURT-29-AT market (Thapar as next SCOTUS justice) is priced at 11%, down 4% over 30 days, which implicitly reflects the market's aggregate view on all three conditional stages combined. Yes
10 STRONG 80 ↑ UP kalshi_data The Senate currently holds a 53-47 Republican majority, making confirmation of a Trump SCOTUS nominee highly likely if nominated, assuming party discipline. Yes
11 WEAK 45 ↓ DOWN web_search Thapar's 'red list' designation by a conservative judicial vetting group could complicate Senate confirmation if it leads to conservative defections or organized opposition, though the designation's practical influence on Senate votes is uncertain. No
12 WEAK 50 ↑ UP web_search Thapar has been publicly active at Federalist Society events (November 2025), suggesting he remains engaged in conservative legal networks that would be supportive during a confirmation process. Yes
Information Gaps
  • No specific reporting on what the full Trump 2025 SCOTUS shortlist contains or how many 'green list' candidates are ranked above Thapar by the vetting coalition
  • No information on the specific nature of the 'red list' concerns about Thapar — whether they relate to ideology, judicial record, personal conduct, or other factors
  • No data on whether Clarence Thomas or other justices have made any private or public signals about retirement plans
  • No reporting on whether Trump has expressed a personal preference for Thapar or other candidates in his second term
  • The web and article searches returned no articles from 2025-10-17 to 2026-04-15, creating a substantial evidence gap for recent developments
  • No information on competing shortlist candidates (e.g., other Sixth Circuit or D.C. Circuit judges) who might be preferred over Thapar
  • The resolution requires Thapar to be the FIRST confirmed justice — no data exists on whether Trump might appoint multiple justices and whether Thapar would be first or second if multiple vacancies arise
Key Uncertainties
  • Whether the 'red list' vetting designation will actually deter Trump from nominating Thapar or whether Trump historically ignores such coalition pressure
  • Timing and nature of any SCOTUS vacancy — a Thomas retirement (57% per Kalshi) would likely prompt a different nominee profile than a liberal justice departure
  • Whether Trump's personal relationship with and regard for Thapar has changed since his first term, when Thapar was not selected despite being shortlisted
  • Whether the 'first Asian-American justice' narrative gains political traction with Trump's White House as a strategic consideration
  • How many total SCOTUS vacancies will arise — if multiple vacancies occur, Thapar could be second rather than first, causing NO resolution even if eventually confirmed
  • The 30-day downward trend (-4%) in Thapar's Kalshi price may reflect new information not captured in available sources
Market Context
Price: 0.11 · 7d: -0.02 · 30d: -0.04
Volume: LOW-MODERATE — 136 contracts/day average · Depth: HIGH — depth of 17,805 contracts with high liquidity designation
Reliability: MEDIUM — moderate volume but high depth; 49-day price history shows price has declined from a high of 0.19 to current 0.11, suggesting the market has updated downward over time. The large spread (yes_bid=$0.00, no_bid=$0.04) is unusual and may indicate thin yes-side interest. Overall the 11% price reflects a fairly liquid market consensus but the zero yes-bid is a red flag for yes-side conviction.
4. Independent Forecaster Opus · No market price · legacy v2 Did NOT see market price
Independent estimate: 6% (55% confidence)
base rate
6%
55% conf
evidence driven
6%
55% conf
contrarian
6%
55% conf
Spread
0pp
Low disagreement
sq1: Will there be a Supreme Court vacancy that needs to be filled before January 20, 2029?
78%
Base rate: 8 of 12 recent presidential terms had at least one vacancy = 66.7%. Evidence pushes UP: Thomas (77) and Alito (75) are both older conservative justices who have strong incentives to retire under a Republican president with a Republican Senate — this is a uniquely favorable window for strategic retirements. Sotomayor (71) has diabetes and health concerns. The combination of three justices over 70, two of whom have strong strategic retirement incentives, pushes this above the base rate. I estimate ~78%. The remaining ~2.75 years is substantial time. Even if Thomas alone has a ~55-60% chance of retiring, the probability that at least one of Thomas, Alito, or Sotomayor departs (or any justice has a health emergency) is quite high.
sq2: If a Supreme Court vacancy opens, will Trump nominate Amul Thapar to fill it?
10%
Base rate: Trump's shortlists typically contain 20-25 names. Even being on the shortlist and interviewed (as Thapar was in 2018), the selection probability for any individual is roughly 1/20 to 1/5 depending on how seriously they're considered. Thapar was interviewed in 2018 but NOT selected, suggesting he's a strong contender but not the top choice. Starting estimate: ~15-20%. STRONG downward evidence: The 'red list' designation by a conservative judicial vetting coalition is significant. This suggests organized conservative opposition, which Trump's team has historically been responsive to (Heritage Foundation, Federalist Society influence). This pushes DOWN by ~8-10%. MODERATE upward evidence: Thapar remains on the shortlist and the 'first Asian-American justice' narrative could provide political appeal. This pushes UP by ~2-3%. Net assessment: The red list designation is quite damaging. Trump passed on him before, and now he faces organized conservative skepticism. If there are 4-6 serious contenders for any vacancy and Thapar has a disadvantage from the red list, his probability drops to ~8-12%. I also need to account for the FIRST vacancy constraint — if multiple vacancies open, Thapar being nominated for the second rather than first would resolve NO. This further reduces by ~1-2%. Final: 10%.
sq3: If Thapar is nominated, will the Senate confirm him before January 20, 2029?
82%
Base rate: Recent SCOTUS nominees from the president's party with a Senate majority are confirmed at very high rates. All three Trump first-term nominees were confirmed. Republicans hold 53-47. Base rate ~90%. WEAK downward evidence: The 'red list' designation could cause 1-3 conservative defections (e.g., senators who defer to the vetting coalition). If 3-4 Republicans defect, confirmation fails. This pushes DOWN by ~5-8%. The red list concern is meaningful because it suggests potential for organized opposition within the Republican caucus, not just Democratic opposition. WEAK upward evidence: Thapar's Federalist Society engagement and prior confirmation to the 6th Circuit suggest he can navigate the process. Pushes UP by ~1-2%. Net: ~82%. The red list issue is the main risk — if Trump nominated him despite the red list, it would signal Trump's personal commitment, but some senators might still balk.
Show full reasoning trace
base rate: Historical base rate for SCOTUS vacancies per term is ~67%. For any individual shortlisted candidate being selected, roughly 5-20% depending on shortlist depth and candidate strength. Confirmation rates for nominees from the president's party with Senate majority are ~90%+.
evidence updates: The strongest evidence is the 'red list' designation, which significantly reduces both nomination probability (organized conservative opposition makes Trump less likely to choose Thapar over 'green list' alternatives) and slightly reduces confirmation probability. Thapar's prior non-selection in 2018 despite being interviewed is also moderately negative. The vacancy probability is elevated above base rate due to three justices over 70 with strategic retirement incentives.
combination method: Conditional chain: P(vacancy) × P(nominated | vacancy) × P(confirmed | nominated). The sub-questions are naturally sequential and conditional.
final: At ~6%, this reflects that while a vacancy is quite likely, Thapar faces significant headwinds: he was passed over before, he's now on a 'red list' from conservative vetting groups, and he must compete against presumably multiple 'green list' candidates. The combination of these factors makes his specific selection unlikely, even though a SCOTUS appointment by Trump in general is probable.
ensemble: {'ensemble_count': 3, 'perspectives': {'base_rate': {'p_yes': 0.06, 'confidence': 0.55}, 'evidence_driven': {'p_yes': 0.06, 'confidence': 0.55}, 'contrarian': {'p_yes': 0.06, 'confidence': 0.55}}, 'spread': 0.0, 'individual_p_yes': {'base_rate': 0.06, 'evidence_driven': 0.06, 'contrarian': 0.06}}
5. Devil's Advocate Sonnet · legacy v2 Market price revealed
Reasoning Flaw Missing Info Asymmetric Evidence
Challenges
  1. The ensemble shows zero spread across all three perspectives (base_rate, evidence_driven, contrarian all at exactly 0.06). This is a red flag — a genuine contrarian perspective should meaningfully differ from the base rate perspective. The contrarian should consider scenarios where Thapar's 'red list' status is overblown, where Trump specifically wants diversity optics, or where the shortlist is shorter than assumed. This artificial convergence suggests the ensemble wasn't genuinely stress-tested.
  2. The 'red list' designation is treated as the dominant negative factor, but there's an acknowledged information gap about what the red list concerns actually are. If the concerns are about Thapar being insufficiently conservative (unlikely given his Federalist Society engagement), that's very different from concerns about confirmability or judicial temperament. The forecaster is weighting this evidence strongly without understanding its substance, which could lead to over- or under-weighting.
  3. The estimate of 4-6 serious contenders for any vacancy may be too low OR too high — we simply don't know. If Trump has a clear top-2 preference and Thapar is one of them despite the red list (Trump has historically bucked establishment recommendations), the nomination probability conditional on vacancy could be significantly higher than 10%. Conversely, if there are 10+ serious candidates, it could be lower.
  4. The forecaster doesn't adequately account for the possibility that the 6-month evidence gap (October 2025 to April 2026) may contain important developments — either retirement announcements, shortlist changes, or political dynamics that could dramatically shift probabilities in either direction. This gap should increase uncertainty, not leave it at the same level.
  5. The confirmation probability of 82% seems reasonable but may slightly underweight the 'if Trump nominated him despite the red list' signal. A nomination itself would represent a very strong signal of Trump's commitment, which would likely bring most Republican senators in line. Historical precedent shows that once a president commits to a nominee, party discipline is very strong — the relevant comparison is more like 90-95% than 82%.
  6. The downward adjustment for 'first vacancy constraint' (reducing by 1-2% because Thapar might be nominated for a second rather than first vacancy) is reasonable in direction but the magnitude seems arbitrary and small. If there are two vacancies, the probability of being chosen for at least one of them goes up, but the question specifically asks about being the NEXT justice. This constraint deserves more careful analysis — in a two-vacancy scenario, Thapar might actually be MORE likely to be nominated for one of them but the 'next' constraint reduces the benefit.
Suggested adjustment: +2pp
The zero-spread ensemble suggests insufficient exploration of upside scenarios. The confirmation probability is likely understated (should be ~88-90% conditional on nomination, since the act of nomination itself signals Trump's commitment and party discipline). Combined with the possibility that the red list is being overweighted without knowing its substance, and that the contrarian case (Trump values diversity optics, shorter effective shortlist) wasn't genuinely explored, a modest upward adjustment of ~2 percentage points is warranted. This brings the estimate to ~8%, still well below the market's 11%.
Market comparison: Forecaster: 6%, Market: 11%. The 5-point divergence is notable but not extreme. The forecaster's reasoning is generally sound — the red list designation and prior non-selection are legitimate negative signals. However, the market may be incorporating information from the evidence gap period (Oct 2025 - Apr 2026) or may weight Thapar's shortlist presence and diversity appeal more heavily. The market has been declining (from 19% to 11% over ~49 days), suggesting it's converging somewhat toward the forecaster's view. The divergence is partially justified by the forecaster's specific evidence about the red list, but the forecaster's flat ensemble and potential overweighting of the red list without understanding its substance suggest the true probability is likely between the two estimates.
6. Aggregator Opus · final calibrated forecast
9% (45% confidence)
My independent estimate of 6% was based on the conditional chain: ~78% vacancy probability × ~10% nomination probability (given red list designation and prior non-selection in 2018) × ~82% confirmation probability. I ACCEPT the Devil's Advocate's critique that the ensemble showed zero spread (a genuine flaw), that the confirmation probability should be higher (~90% given that nomination itself signals commitment), and that the red list may be overweighted without knowing its substance. I PARTIALLY ACCEPT the market signal at 11% — the market has high depth (17,805 contracts) and has been declining from 19% toward my estimate, suggesting informed participants are updating downward. However, the market likely incorporates information from the Oct 2025-Apr 2026 evidence gap and may better price Thapar's diversity appeal and shortlist persistence. I settle at 9%, splitting the difference but leaning toward my evidence-based assessment that the red list and prior non-selection are meaningful negative signals that the market may be underweighting.