Ahmed Taha (Wake Forest) circulated an interesting paper, Judges' Political Orientations and the Selection of Disputes for Litigation," focusing on the influence of judges' ideology on settlement behavior. Taha's paper explores various case types and assesses whether (perceptions of) judge ideology influences which cases settle and which go forward. The study finds that:
"... at least for some types of
cases, judges' political orientations have significant effects on the
number of cases filed. Thus, the political orientations of even trial
court judges have important effects on the outcomes of the federal
justice system: fewer potential plaintiffs seek relief in federal
courts if they believe the judges are less likely to be sympathetic to
their cases. This finding also helps explain the surprising findings of
other researchers that a federal district judge's political orientation
generally does not affect the probability that a case ends in a
judgment for the plaintiff or a settlement. This paper's findings
suggest that those results are based on a selection bias: because
parties believe that judges' political orientations matter, they are
likely settling cases on more favorable terms for the plaintiffs if the
cases are assigned to Democratic judges rather than to Republican
judges."
Comments