Journal of Empirical Legal Studies最新文献

This paper studies a probation program in Cologne, Germany. The program, which has a clear rehabilitative focus, offers intensified personal support to serious juvenile offenders over the first 6 months of their probation period. To evaluate the program's impact on recidivism, we draw on two research designs. Firstly, a small-scale randomized trial assigns offenders to probation with regular or intensified support. Secondly, a regression discontinuity design exploits a cutoff that defines program eligibility. The results suggest that the program reduces recidivism. The effect seems persistent over at least 3 years. Our evidence further indicates that the drop in recidivism is strongest among less severe offenders.

This paper argues that estimating causal effects on US Appellate Court panels can be advanced by analyzing the data as a series of natural experiments, fully exploiting the as-if random assignment of judges to cases. As a template, this paper reanalyzes Boyd et al.'s data on sex-discrimination cases. The question is the impact on the votes by male judges from having a female judge on their panel. Leverage from as-if random assignment can be exploited only by restricting comparisons of treatments cases (in the example, female co-panelist) exclusively to control cases (all-male panels) from the same period and time period from which the treatment cases are drawn. With as-if random assignment reducing the possibility of a biased estimate, the results confirms a gender panel effect similar in size to the claim by Boyd et al. Restricting comparisons to within the same circuit and time period further advances understanding of the causal mechanism. When male or female judges side with female plaintiffs, the females are more persuasive at swaying the votes of their male co-panelists' votes.

In this article I present the first two of a new series of open and high-quality international legal data sets: comprehensive, fully reproducible, human- and machine-readable open access collections covering one hundred years of case law of the primary judicial organs of the United Nations and the League of Nations: the Corpus of Decisions: International Court of Justice (CD-ICJ) and the Corpus of Decisions: Permanent Court of International Justice (CD-PCIJ). Each corpus is designed to capture in its entirety the published case law of its eponymous Court, including majority opinions (judgments, advisory opinions and orders), but also the minority opinions annexed to each decision (declarations, separate opinions and dissenting opinions). The corpora are enriched with useful metadata to enhance text-as-data research and enable stand-alone metadata analyses. While each corpus can stand on its own, the twin corpora are designed to be perfectly interoperable for the purposes of analyses that wish to treat the ICJ and PCIJ as a continuous entity. The most recent versions of the corpora will always be available open access at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3826444 (CD-ICJ) and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3840479 (CD-PCIJ).

Copyright termination laws in the United States allow creators to end their copyright assignments and licences after various time periods and regain their rights. These laws are designed to protect authors and their heirs by giving them a second opportunity to profit from their works, where they might have assigned them initially for relatively little. Similar laws are in force and being recommended for implementation around the world. However, there is little data on how these laws are being used. Such data is vital because it provides insights into the pros and cons of different systems. We fill this gap by providing the first large-scale study of copyright termination notice records from the U.S. Copyright Office. Utilising data scraping and manipulation techniques in the Python programming language, we have created two brand new datasets for scholars, copyright experts, creators, publishers, and other industry stakeholders to examine. In our accompanying paper, we document some preliminary trends from the data and how it might be used for further analysis.

Excessive CEO power is often regarded as value-destroying. We use a quasi-exogenous regulatory shock to analyze whether improved governance helps to channel firms with powerful CEOs toward more value-enhancing corporate policies. We use the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and NYSE/NASDAQ listing rules and focus on firms that were required to improve governance. We find that postregulation firms led by powerful CEOs increase innovation inputs (Research and Development expenditures) and produce more innovation outputs (patents) that are scientifically more important (citations) and economically more valuable (market value of patents). Investment quality also improves, manifesting in better takeover performance and improvements in firm performance and corporate value. Our results suggest that improved governance can mitigate value destruction in powerful CEO-managed firms. We take steps to mitigate econometric concerns and ensure our results are robust to various combinations of fixed effects and control variables.

It is widely claimed that the level of transnational litigation in U.S. courts is high and increasing, primarily due to forum shopping by foreign plaintiffs. This “transnational forum shopping claim” reflects the conventional wisdom among transnational litigation scholars. Lawyers use the claim in briefs; judges use it in court opinions; and interest groups use it to promote law reform. This article reassesses the transnational forum shopping claim theoretically and empirically. It argues that despite globalization, there are reasons to doubt the claim. Changes in procedural and substantive law have made the U.S. legal system less attractive to plaintiffs than it supposedly once was. Meanwhile, other legal systems have been adopting features similar to those that are said to have made the United States a “magnet forum” for foreign plaintiffs, and arbitration is growing as an alternative to transnational litigation. Empirically, using data on approximately 8 million civil actions filed in the U.S. district courts since 1988, the article shows that transnational diversity cases represent only a small portion of overall litigation, their level has decreased overall, and U.S., not foreign, plaintiffs file most of them. The data also reveal that federal question filings by foreign resident plaintiffs are not extensive or increasing either. These findings challenge the transnational forum shopping claim and law reforms based on it, and suggest that it should no longer be used by lawyers, judges, and scholars—at least not without supporting data. The article’s analysis also suggests new directions for transnational litigation as a field of scholarship that would move it beyond its current focus on U.S. courts toward a focus on understanding the dynamics of transnational litigation in global context.

Collegiality plays a central role in judicial decision-making. However, we still lack empirical evidence about the effects of collegiality on judicial decision-making. In this article, I argue familiarity, an antecedent to collegiality, improves judicial deliberations by encouraging minority dissent and a more extensive debate of different legal viewpoints. Relying on a novel dataset of 21,613 appeals in criminal cases at the German Federal Court of Justice between 1990 and 2016, I exploit quasi-random assignment of cases to decision-making groups to show that judges' pairwise familiarity substantially increases the probability that judges schedule a main hearing after first-stage deliberations. Group familiarity also increases the length of the justification of the ruling. The findings have implications for the way courts organize the assignment of judges to panels.

How well do firearm markets comply with firearm restrictions? The Massachusetts Attorney General issued an Enforcement Notice in 2016 to announce a new interpretation of the key phrase “copies and duplicates” in the state's assault weapons ban. The Enforcement Notice increased assault rifle sales by 1349 (+560%) within 5 days, followed by a reduction of 211 (−58%) over the next 3 weeks. Assault rifle sales were 64%–66% lower in 2017 than in comparable earlier periods, suggesting that the Enforcement Notice reduced assault weapon sales but also that many banned weapons continued to be sold.

We offer the first large-scale descriptive study of residential leases, based on a novel dataset of ~170,000 residential leases filed in support of over ~200,000 Philadelphia eviction proceedings from 2005 through 2019. These leases are highly likely to contain unenforceable terms, and their pro-landlord tilt has increased sharply over time. Matching leases with individual tenant characteristics, and to 16,261 unique owner-landlords, we show that unenforceable terms are likely to be associated with more expensive leaseholds in richer, whiter parts of the city. This result is linked to particular landlords' growing adoption of shared forms, originally created by nonprofit landlord associations, and more recently available online for a nominal fee. Generally, such shared form leases contain worse rules for tenants than the proprietary leases they replace. Over time, it has become easier and cheaper for landlords to adopt such common forms, meaning that access to justice for landlords strips tenants of rights.