The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Calling Balls And Strikes During Warmup Pitches
Judge Matey explains that umpires indicate what the strike zone will be during warmup pitches that do not count.
During today's convention, Judge Paul Matey of the Third Circuit did a SOC! Sidebar on Baseball cards. Judge Matey has some insights on how baseball cards interacts with the law, but he made a point about calling balls and strike that I had never heard before.
By now, everyone knows Chief Justice Roberts's famous line that umpire simply call balls and strikes. But Judge Matey made a different point. Before a pitcher throws his first official pitch, he will throw several warmup pitches. Though these pitches do not count, the umpire will signal whether the pitch is a ball or a strike. These warmup pitches allow the pitcher to understand what the judge's strike zone will be. From game to game, an umpire might change his strike zone. But the hope is that an umpire will use the same strike zone in that particular game, or at least for that particular pitcher. That way pitchers, catchers, and batters know the rules of the game.
I think Matey had illustrated yet another reason why Roberts's analogy doesn't work. Lawyers do not get to throw throw warmup pitches in practice cases. They have only one shot to make their case. It is possible to guess on a strike zone based on past calls, but that practice is imprecise.
What about the Chief Justice? Roberts does not apply consistent strike zones--even in the same case. Do I need to mention NFIB v. Sebelius again? (I was surprised no one brought up the regulatory power of taxes yesterday during the tariff case.)
I am grateful to Judge Matey for this insight.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
You know, baseball does have a rule book that defines the strike zone.
Oh, that's definitive then. All umpires will interpret it identically, just as all lawyers, judges, and legislators interpret laws identically.
Not definitive of course. Still a sort of important point.
Ya, about as important as saying we have written laws and a written Constitution. Did you have anything less obvious to say?
This is a completely flawed analogy. Umpires do not signal balls and strikes during warm-up pitches. In fact, it would be impossible to do so since the strike zone is defined by the batter’s stance, and the batter is not standing at the plate during warm-up pitches.
That last is pretty funny. So obvious, but I don't watch enough baseball to have thought of it.
From the MLB rules, Strike Zone definition:
"The official strike zone is the area over home plate from the midpoint between a batter's shoulders and the top of the uniform pants -- when the batter is in his stance and prepared to swing at a pitched ball -- and a point just below the kneecap. In order to get a strike call, part of the ball must cross over part of home plate while in the aforementioned area."
Not only is the warmup reference wrong, but so is the notion that an umpire has a single strike zone that he applies consistently from batter to batter.
The man said he call balls and strikes. Has he ever promised to do so fairly?
Then-Judge John Roberts told the Senate at his confirmation hearing:
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/supreme-court-landmarks/nomination-process/chief-justice-roberts-statement-nomination-process
Roberts was cagey enough to conceal that the umpire he had in mind was Bill Klem:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidsturt/2013/12/06/sonny-it-aint-nothin-til-i-call-it/
Chief Justice Roberts once had a modicum of integrity. He has since become Donald Trump's handmaid.
So which was the Obamacare penaltax -- integrity, or for Trump? Or both? Or neither?
I'd never heard this before, so I took a look at some YouTube videos to see if it might be something I'd missed. I couldn't find any where this was happening, and in most of them the ump wasn't even behind the plate. As Kyle noted the zone is defined by the batter, but if the up were behind the plate he could at least signal what kind of width his zone would have, but no, not even that.
it's my job to call balls and strikes ....
He left off "accurately."
There are rules with this court. If a democrat is president, he always strikes out at the plate. If a republican is president, at the plate there is no such thing as a strike.
Though these pitches do not count, the umpire will signal whether the pitch is a ball or a strike. These warmup pitches allow the pitcher to understand what the judge's strike zone will be.
I have watched baseball for quite some time and have seen many pitchers throw warm-up pitches.
I have never seen this. Not saying it never is done. But I have not seen it. Likewise, have never seen the analysts (the Mets t.v. analysts are quite active in talking about things) reference it.
Anyway, from the Founding, there was a reference to "umpires" deciding things. Or different institutions serving as "umpires."
The reference was not only applied to judges. And, John Roberts wasn't the first one to use that reference (the "balls and strikes" thing is an added wrinkle). For instance, Justice Harlan (II) did so during an interview.
https://prawfsblawg.com/2025_07_off-the-record-on-miranda/
James Madison spoke of Congress being an "umpire" to settle competing sides. "In cases where it may be doubtful on which side justice lies, what better umpires could be desired by two violent factions, flying to arms and tearing a State to pieces, than the representatives of confederate States not heated by the local flame?"
https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a4_4s7.html
Thomas Jefferson spoke of the law of nature being an "umpire."
"between society & society, or generation & generation, there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature"
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-12-02-0248
John Roberts undersold the discretion umpires have, putting aside that judges have more authority and power to make the rules than baseball umpires.