Legal realists hold judges’ attributes shape judicial outcomes

Evidence

Judges differ on a number of dimensions, including age, experience, race, gender, and political affiliation, among others. Although legal formalism suggests that the facts of a case, the fundamental principles of judicial decisionmaking, and the letter of law should determine judicial outcomes, it has long been argued by legal realists that attributes of judges, ranging from life experiences to ideological beliefs, can have an impact on judicial decisions. Leading legal realist Judge Jerome Frank, who served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, has even argued that a judge’s decision may be impacted by mundane things, including what he/she ate for breakfast (see Frank, 1973). — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 746 (#expands, via linked claim)

Do judges’ personal attitudes influence the outcome of cases? Despite judges’ efforts to banish personal views from their decisions (see Box 8.3), many studies suggest that judges’ attitudes do affect their votes. What is particularly significant is that the judges’ votes often follow clear patterns, dividing along what might be considered liberal and conservative lines. The U.S. Supreme Court furnishes a prime example. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2579 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The legal perspective holds law as the primary determinant of judicial decisions — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1360; Judges’ values and discretion mean who sits matters for outcomes — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 499; Judges bring consistent long-established political views to the bench — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2572 (+8 more)

Broader Connections

• Judge attributes beyond the law shape judicial outcomes #expands (0.95) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 746
• Judges’ personal attitudes systematically shape their case votes. #corroborates (0.92) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2579