Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Role of Law in Close Cases: Some Evidence from the Federal Courts of Appeal

15 Pages Posted: 24 Aug 2006  

Ward Farnsworth

University of Texas at Austin - School of Law

Date Written: August 24, 2006

Abstract

This article is an empirical study of the voting behavior of 30 federal appellate judges in criminal cases that weren't decided unanimously. The cases were divided into two sets: those that involved disputes over constitutional law and those that involved disputes over other kinds of legal materials (e.g., statutes and rules). The basic results are that (a) judges vary widely in how often they vote for the government in non-unanimous cases, but (b) any given judge votes for the government about as often in such cases regardless of whether they involve debates over the Constitution or other sources of law. The most plausible reason for the tight correlation is that in close cases of any kind judges use the same policy preferences or views of human behavior as their sources of decision.

Keywords: attitudinalism, ideology, judging, empirical, federal courts of appeals, politics, legal realism

JEL Classification: K14, K40, K41, K49

Suggested Citation

Farnsworth, Ward, Role of Law in Close Cases: Some Evidence from the Federal Courts of Appeal (August 24, 2006). Boston University School of Law Working Paper No. 06-24. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=926316 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.926316

Ward Farnsworth (Contact Author)

University of Texas at Austin - School of Law ( email )

727 East Dean Keeton Street
Austin, TX 78705
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
135
Rank
182,563
Abstract Views
1,728