Working Paper: NBER ID: w29788
Authors: Elliott Ash; Daniel L. Chen; Suresh Naidu
Abstract: This paper provides a quantitative analysis of the effects of the early law-and- economics movement on the U.S. judiciary. We focus on the Manne Economics Institute for Federal Judges, an intensive economics course that trained almost half of federal judges between 1976 and 1999. Using the universe of published opinions in U.S. Circuit Courts and 1 million District Court criminal sentencing decisions, we estimate the within-judge effect of Manne program attendance. Selection into attendance was limited—the program was popular across judges from all backgrounds, was regularly oversubscribed, and admitted judges on a first-come first-served basis—and results are robust to a variety of automatically selected covariates predicting the timing of attendance. We find that after attending economics training, participating judges use more economics language in their opinions, issue more conservative decisions in economics-related cases, rule against regulatory agencies more often, favor more lax enforcement in antitrust cases, and impose more/longer criminal sentences. The law-and- economics movement had policy consequences via its influence on U.S. federal judges.
Keywords: Law and Economics; Judicial Decision-Making; Economic Analysis of Law
JEL Codes: B20; K00
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| Manne Economics Institute attendance (E39) | increased use of economic language in judicial opinions (K40) |
| Manne Economics Institute attendance (E39) | more conservative decisions in economics-related cases (E65) |
| Manne Economics Institute attendance (E39) | longer criminal sentences (K14) |
| longer criminal sentences (K14) | increased severity in sentencing post-Booker decision (K40) |
| Manne Economics Institute attendance (E39) | shift in decision-making patterns (D91) |