Empathy and Article III: Judge Weinstein, Cases and Controversies

Abstract

The question of whether judges ought to be empathetic has been hotly debated in recent years. This volume celebrating the life and achievements of Judge Jack Weinstein presents an ideal opportunity to productively focus and narrow the empathy debate. Problematically, this debate generally treats judging as a monolithic concept. To debate whether empathy is a desirable attribute of judges as a general matter is to overlook important distinctions between trial, appellate, and Supreme Court jurists, and between federal and state courts. Using Judge Weinstein’s approach to judging as a touchstone, I explore the role of empathy for Article III judges, and for federal district court judges in particular.

Keywords: judicial decision-making, federal courts, federal district courts, Judge Jack Weinstein, empathy, moral imagination