ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Prawfs

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: Prawfs

The Invisible Side of the Judicial Bed

By Dan Markel, Ethan Leib, Rick Garnett, Matt Bodie, Paul Horwitz , Steve Vladeck, and Orly Lobel

ADVERTISEMENTS
On occasion we all wake up grumpy (or grumpier than usual).  We?re a touch more critical, a pinch more pessimistic, a bit less filled with neighborly love.  Sometimes coffee and carbohydrates restore our spirits; other times an internal scowl lingers.  As a result, minor decisions?e.g., whether to snap at a colleague, criticize a spouse?s outfit, skip a conference call?may turn out differently than if we were in our ?normal? mood.   The same is true in the opposite direction if we wake up feeling like Ned Flanders. 

Judges, human as the rest of us, are subject to the vicissitudes of mood.  How often do judges? unusual mental states?from euphoria associated with the birth of a grandchild, to occasional cheerfulness/grumpiness, to profound mental distress occasioned by spousal loss?affect their legal decisions?  Put another way: assume both Human Judge A and Robot Judge A normally make decisions according to the same set of jurisprudential heuristics.  Human Judge A?s mood varies with roughly the same frequency and magnitude as a normal white-collar professional of similar age and education; Robot Judge A?s mood never varies. 

How often will their decisions differ?

My own intuition, as yet uncorrupted by any effort at empirical study, is that (1) a nontrivial amount of ?mood-based decisional divergence? occurs and (2) the divergence decreases the higher up the appellate food chain one rises.   Among other things, the institutional structure and dynamics of the Supreme Court, as well as the intense scrutiny that accompanies all their judicial acts, seem to be powerful mood-scrubbers.  Trial court judicial acts?including innumerable discovery and evidentiary decisions?seem much more susceptible to mood divergence.    

Agree? Disagree? I?m also interested to hear examples where credible biographers/observers have concluded that particular Supreme Court Justice?s opinion or opinions were significantly influenced by his/her unusual mental state at the time a case was decided.   

Full post as published by Prawfs on September 20, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.002 secs (from cache 11/04/26 02:44:27)