Outcomes and Precedents

Abstract:     
How does panel composition affect the interplay between the outcome of a case and the precedents cited in the corresponding written opinion? We test the hypothesis that a political majority addresses the concerns of the political minority on a three-judge panel. This theory suggests that the mixed panel will cite different precedents when writing the opinion. For example, a panel with two Republican-appointees and a Democratic-appointee will cite more liberal precedents than a panel of three Republicans when writing a conservative opinion. We create a dataset looking at over 4,000 Court of Appeals cases from 1977-2007, whose written opinions include over 38,000 citations of Supreme Court precedents. We find limited evidence in support of the hypothesis. The differences between DRR panels and RRR panels are largely consistent with the theory. There is no evidence for our hypothesis when comparing DDR and DDD panels.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 29

Keywords: Precedent, Citations, Outcomes, Panel effects, Panel composition

working papers series