Subjects -> LAW (Total: 1397 journals)
    - CIVIL LAW (30 journals)
    - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (52 journals)
    - CORPORATE LAW (65 journals)
    - CRIMINAL LAW (28 journals)
    - FAMILY AND MATRIMONIAL LAW (23 journals)
    - INTERNATIONAL LAW (161 journals)
    - JUDICIAL SYSTEMS (23 journals)
    - LAW (843 journals)
    - LAW: GENERAL (11 journals)

LAW (843 journals)            First | 1 2 3 4 5     

Showing 201 - 354 of 354 Journals sorted alphabetically
Evaluation Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Evidence & Policy : A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Federal Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 48)
Feminist Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
feminists@law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fiat Justisia     Open Access  
First Amendment Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Florida Bar News     Free  
Fordham Environmental Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 17)
Fordham Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 14)
Forensic Science International : Mind and Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
FORO. Revista de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, Nueva Época     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Frónesis     Open Access  
Geoforum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 25)
George Washington Law Review     Free   (Followers: 7)
Georgia State University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
German Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Global Energy Law and Sustainability     Hybrid Journal  
Global Journal of Comparative Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Global Labour Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 15)
Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Golden Gate University Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Graduate Law Journal     Open Access  
Grey Room     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
Griffith Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
GRUR International     Full-text available via subscription  
GSTF Journal of Law and Social Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Hakam : Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam dan Hukum Ekonomi Islam     Open Access  
Haramaya Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Harvard Environmental Law Review     Free   (Followers: 12)
Harvard Human Rights Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy     Free   (Followers: 34)
Harvard Journal of Law and Gender     Free   (Followers: 24)
Harvard Law Review     Free   (Followers: 94)
Hasanuddin Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Hastings Law Journal     Free   (Followers: 8)
Health Matrix : The Journal of Law-Medicine     Open Access  
Helsinki Law Review     Open Access  
High Court Quarterly Review, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Hofstra Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Horyzonty Polityki     Open Access  
Houston Law Review     Free   (Followers: 4)
Hukum Islam     Open Access  
IALS Student Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
IDÉIAS : Revista dos estudantes da Faculdade de Direito do Recife (UFPE)     Open Access  
IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Politica     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Ihering : Cuadernos de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Indian Law Review     Hybrid Journal  
Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies     Full-text available via subscription  
Indiana Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Indigenous Law Bulletin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
Indigenous Peoples’ Journal of Law, Culture & Resistance     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Indonesia Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Indonesian Journal of Law and Society     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Indonesian Journal of Legal and Forensic Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Information & Communications Technology Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
InSURgência : revista de direitos e movimentos sociais     Open Access  
Inter: Revista de Direito Internacional e Direitos Humanos da UFRJ     Open Access  
Intergenerational Justice Review     Open Access  
International and Comparative Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
International Cybersecurity Law Review     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
International Data Privacy Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
International Free and Open Source Software Law Review     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
International Journal of Children's Rights     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
International Journal of Clinical Legal Education     Open Access  
International Journal of Culture and Modernity     Open Access  
International Journal of Disclosure and Governance     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
International Journal of Healthcare Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Language & Law     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
International Journal of Law and Politics Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Law Reconstruction     Open Access  
International Journal of Legal Information     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 49)
International Journal of Legal Medicine     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
International Journal of Mental Health and Capacity Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Public Legal Education     Open Access  
International Journal of Punishment and Sentencing, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 8)
International Journal of Rural Law and Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
International Journal of Speech Language and the Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
International Journal of Technology Policy and Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
International Journal of the Legal Profession     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
International Law Research     Open Access  
International Peacekeeping     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 250)
International Sports Law Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
International Theory: A Journal of International Politics, Law and Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
IP Theory     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Isonomía. Revista de Teoría y Filosofía del Derecho     Open Access  
Italian Review of Legal History     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Iter Ad Veritatem     Open Access  
Iuris Dictio     Open Access  
Iuris Tantum Revista Boliviana de Derecho     Open Access  
Ius Canonicum     Full-text available via subscription  
Ius et Praxis     Open Access  
IUS ET SCIENTIA     Open Access  
IUSTA : Derecho, investigación, conflicto, prácticas jurídicas     Open Access  
James Cook University Law Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Jeffrey S. Moorad Sports Law Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies)     Open Access  
Jindal Global Law Review     Hybrid Journal  
John Marshall Law Review     Full-text available via subscription  
John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law     Free   (Followers: 8)
Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of African Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Applied Law and Policy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Banking Regulation     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Journal of Business & Technology Law     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Conflict and Security Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Dinamika Hukum     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Empirical Legal Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Journal of European Consumer and Market Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law     Open Access   (Followers: 22)
Journal of Human Security     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Information Rights, Policy and Practice     Open Access  
Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Technology, Planning, and Operations     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of International Peacekeeping     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 216)
Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Law and Conflict Resolution     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Law and Courts     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Law and Health     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Law and Legal Reform     Open Access  
Journal of Law and Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Law and Regulation     Open Access  
Journal of Law and Religion     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Law and Social Policy     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Law and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 43)
Journal of Law and the Biosciences     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization     Open Access   (Followers: 13)
Journal of Law, Religion and State     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Legal Analysis     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Legal Anthropology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Legal Education     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Legal Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 46)
Journal of Legal Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 8)
Journal of Legal Studies Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Media Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Journal of National Security Law & Policy     Free   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Nursing Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Penal Law & Criminology     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Perpetrator Research     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Planning Education and Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Journal of Politics     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 53)
Journal of Politics and Law     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Journal of Property Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Psychiatry & Law     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Journal of Supreme Court History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Trafficking and Human Exploitation     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Victimology and Victim Justice     Hybrid Journal  
Journal of World Energy Law & Business     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Judicial Officers Bulletin     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Judicial Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Juridica International     Open Access  
Jurídicas CUC     Open Access  
Jurisdictie Jurnal Hukum dan Syariah     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Jurist-Diction     Open Access  
Jurnal Akta     Open Access  
Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Cita Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Daulat Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan     Open Access  
Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Ekonomi     Open Access  
Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan     Open Access  
Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus     Open Access  
Jurnal hukum Prasada     Open Access  
Jurnal Hukum Respublica     Open Access  
Jurnal Idea Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Pancasila dan Kewarganegaraan     Open Access  
Jurnal Jurisprudence     Open Access  
Jurnal Justisia : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Perundang-undangan dan Pranata Sosial     Open Access  
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal)     Open Access  
Jurnal Mimbar Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada     Open Access  
Jurnal Notariil     Open Access  
Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum     Open Access  
Jurnal Repertorium     Open Access  
Jurnal Suara Keadilan     Open Access  
Jus Cogens : A Critical Journal of Philosophy of Law and Politics     Hybrid Journal  
Jussens Venner     Full-text available via subscription  
Justiça do Direito     Open Access  
Justice Research and Policy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Justicia     Open Access  
Justicia Juris     Open Access  
Justitia et Pax     Open Access  
Kanun : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum     Open Access  
Kertha Patrika     Open Access  
Kertha Wicaksana     Open Access  

  First | 1 2 3 4 5     

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Journal of Legal Analysis
Journal Prestige (SJR): 1.704
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 6  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 2161-7201 - ISSN (Online) 1946-5319
Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [419 journals]
  • Investing in Private Evidence: The Effect of Adversarial Discovery

    • Authors: Guerra A; Parisi F.
      Pages: 657 - 671
      Abstract: AbstractMuch of the conventional wisdom of evidence law rests on the premise that the amount of evidence available in any given case is exogenously determined. With the advent of evidence technology (e.g. dashcams, black-box technology, digital data storage, surveillance cameras), the availability of evidence is substantially controlled by individuals. In this article, we show that evidence rules play an important role in determining individuals’ decisions to invest in private evidence. We compare the evidence rules adopted in the USA and Europe and analyze their relative impact on the voluntary adoption of evidence technology. We find that by making private evidence not discoverable, more rather than less evidence would be made available to courts.
      PubDate: Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laac002
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2022)
  • Indirect Investor Protection: The Investment Ecosystem and Its Legal

    • Authors: Spamann H.
      Pages: 672 - 734
      Abstract: AbstractThis article argues that the key mechanisms protecting portfolio investors in public corporate securities are indirect. They do not rely on actions by the investors or by any private actor charged with looking after investors’ interests. Rather, they are provided by the ecosystem that investors (are legally forced to) inhabit, as a byproduct of the self-interested, mutually and legally constrained behavior of third parties without a mandate to help the investors such as speculators, activists, and plaintiff lawyers. This elucidates key rules, resolves the mandatory versus enabling tension in corporate/securities law, and exposes the current system’s fragile reliance on trading.
      PubDate: Thu, 19 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laac003
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2022)
  • The Best of Both Worlds: Compensation via Price-Caps for Passed-On

    • Authors: Yarkoni B; Shalem R, Hannes S.
      Pages: 1 - 42
      Abstract: AbstractWe present a market-based compensation approach to antitrust litigation and other cases of price overcharges. Instead of lump-sum compensation, paid either directly or through coupons, defendants are required to lower their prices for a certain designated period, i.e. price-cap compensation (PCC). We show why previous criticism of PCC was misguided. And, in sharp contrast to the common view in the literature, implementing PCC may have many substantive and procedural advantages. Importantly, although PCC is implemented vis-à-vis direct purchasers only, it reconciles the U.S. and European Union legal approaches and solves the challenge of passed-on damages to indirect purchasers.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa009
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Shining a Light on Dark Patterns

    • Authors: Luguri J; Strahilevitz L.
      Pages: 43 - 109
      Abstract: AbstractDark patterns are user interfaces whose designers knowingly confuse users, make it difficult for users to express their actual preferences, or manipulate users into taking certain actions. They typically exploit cognitive biases and prompt online consumers to purchase goods and services that they do not want or to reveal personal information they would prefer not to disclose. This article provides the first public evidence of the power of dark patterns. It discusses the results of the authors’ two large-scale experiments in which representative samples of American consumers were exposed to dark patterns. In the first study, users exposed to mild dark patterns were more than twice as likely to sign up for a dubious service as those assigned to the control group, and users in the aggressive dark pattern condition were almost four times as likely to subscribe. Moreover, whereas aggressive dark patterns generated a powerful backlash among consumers, mild dark patterns did not. Less educated subjects were significantly more susceptible to mild dark patterns than their well-educated counterparts. The second study identified the dark patterns that seem most likely to nudge consumers into making decisions that they are likely to regret or misunderstand. Hidden information, trick question, and obstruction strategies were particularly likely to manipulate consumers successfully. Other strategies employing loaded language or generating bandwagon effects worked moderately well, while still others such as “must act now” messages did not make consumers more likely to purchase a costly service. Our second study also replicated a striking result in the first experiment, which is that where dark patterns were employed the cost of the service offered to consumers became immaterial. Decision architecture, not price, drove consumer purchasing decisions. The article concludes by examining legal frameworks for addressing dark patterns. Many dark patterns appear to violate federal and state laws restricting the use of unfair and deceptive practices in trade. Moreover, in those instances where consumers enter into contracts after being exposed to dark patterns, their consent could be deemed voidable under contract law principles. The article also proposes that dark pattern audits become part of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s consent decree process. Dark patterns are presumably proliferating because firms’ proprietary A-B testing has revealed them to be profit maximizing. We show how similar A-B testing can be used to identify those dark patterns that are so manipulative that they ought to be deemed unlawful.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa006
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Judges in the Lab: No Precedent Effects, No Common/Civil Law Differences

    • Authors: Spamann H; Klöhn L, Jamin C, et al.
      Pages: 110 - 126
      Abstract: AbstractIn our lab, 299 real judges from seven major jurisdictions (Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, and USA) spend up to fifty-five minutes to judge an international criminal appeals case and determine the appropriate prison sentence. The lab computer (i) logs their use of the documents (briefs, statement of facts, trial judgment, statute, precedent) and (ii) randomly assigns each judge (a) a horizontal precedent disfavoring, favoring, or strongly favoring defendant, (b) a sympathetic or an unsympathetic defendant, and (c) a short, medium, or long sentence anchor. Document use and written reasons differ between countries but not between common and civil law. Precedent effect is barely detectable and estimated to be less, and bounded to be not much greater than, that of legally irrelevant defendant attributes and sentence anchors.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa008
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • The Law and Economics of “Forced” Technology Transfer and Its
           Implications for Trade and Investment Policy (and the U.S.–China Trade

    • Authors: Sykes A.
      Pages: 127 - 171
      Abstract: Abstract“Forced technology transfer” is a central issue in the ongoing U.S.–China trade row. The phrase encompasses a number of different practices, but the most significant according to various commentators involve measures that require foreign investors in China to partner with domestic entities as a condition of making an investment, either by forming a joint venture or affording Chinese investors a controlling equity stake. These “corporate structure requirements” empower prospective Chinese partners to bargain for technology transfer as a condition of forming a new venture or otherwise enable them to learn the details of foreign technology through participation in the business enterprise. Foreign investors are free to reject such requirements and forego the associated investment opportunities, and in this sense any technology transfer pursuant to China’s requirements is “consensual.” For ease of reference, this essay refers to these corporate structure requirements as CSR. The analysis to follow examines the economics of CSR from both the national and global welfare perspectives. It indicates how CSR may undercut the national welfare of the USA even if it is profitable for U.S. investors. The global welfare implications of CSR, however, are much less clear, which offers an explanation for the absence of any constraints on CSR in typical trade agreements. A clear role for restrictions on CSR does emerge, however, in investment agreements that seek to eliminate investment protectionism by requiring “pre-establishment national treatment” for foreign investors. This analysis has immediate policy implications for the ongoing trade dispute with China.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa007
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • The Governance of Foundation-Owned Firms

    • Authors: Hansmann H; Thomsen S.
      Pages: 172 - 230
      Abstract: AbstractThe burgeoning literature on corporate governance, both in economics and in law, has focused heavily on the agency costs of delegated management. It is therefore striking to encounter a large number of well-established and highly successful companies that have long been under the complete control of a self-appointing board of directors whose compensation is divorced from the profitability of the company and who cannot be removed or replaced by anyone except themselves.The companies in question are those controlled by “industrial foundations,” which are nonprofit entities that possess a controlling interest in an otherwise conventional business corporation. Although common throughout Northern Europe, industrial foundations are particularly numerous in Denmark, where they control a quarter of the country’s 100 largest corporations. We work with a data set of 110 foundation-owned Danish firms to explore whether, and how, the governance structure of industrial foundations helps explain the strong performance of the firms they control. Given the absence of substantial material incentives, we concentrate on governance structures. We find a strong and robust relationship between the structure of foundation governance and firm performance. These results reinforce the view that, with the proper governance structure, pure fiduciaries can perform more efficiently than conventional economic models would predict. More specifically, these results underline the potential importance of the legislation that, in 2018, removed the long-standing barrier to forming industrial foundations in the USA.
      PubDate: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa005
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Drawing the Legal Family Tree: An Empirical Comparative Study of 170
           Dimensions of Property Law in 129 Jurisdictions†

    • Authors: Chang Y; Garoupa N, Wells M.
      Pages: 231 - 282
      Abstract: AbstractTraditional comparative private law scholars have a firm grasp of laws in several countries, but rarely of those in more than one hundred countries. Quantitative comparative private law scholars have placed dozens of countries into a legal family genealogy, but not based on a systematic understanding of legal substance around the world. Using a unique, hand-coded data set on 108 property doctrines (transformed into 170 binary variables) in 129 jurisdictions, we ran supervised and unsupervised machine-learning algorithms. Some of our findings confirm the conventional wisdom: French and German property laws are influential; mixed jurisdictions like South Africa and Scotland are one of a kind; common law jurisdictions form a group of their own; and a handful of formerly socialist countries, led by Russia, cluster together. Unlike the prior literature, however, we do not find that East Asian jurisdictions warrant a category of their own; but belong to distant groups. Spain and many Latin American countries form a separate group. Rather than finding a clear-cut common versus civil law division, we observe that the France-inspired group is one supercluster, separate from other jurisdictions.
      PubDate: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa004
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Erratum to: Drawing the Legal Family Tree: An Empirical Comparative Study
           of 170 Dimensions of Property Law in 129 Jurisdictions

    • Authors: Chang Y; Garoupa N, Wells M.
      Pages: 283 - 283
      Abstract: Journal of Legal Analysis, Volume 13, Issue 1, 2021, Pages 127–178,
      PubDate: Mon, 31 May 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab004
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Machine Advice with a Warning about Machine Limitations: Experimentally
           Testing the Solution Mandated by the Wisconsin Supreme Court

    • Authors: Engel C; Grgić-Hlača N.
      Pages: 284 - 340
      Abstract: AbstractThe Wisconsin Supreme Court allows machine advice in the courtroom only if accompanied by a series of warnings. We test 878 US lay participants with jury experience on fifty past cases where we know ground truth. The warnings affect their estimates of the likelihood of recidivism and their confidence, but not their decision whether to grant bail. Participants do not get better at identifying defendants who recidivated during the next two years. Results are essentially the same if participants are warned in easily accessible language, and if they are additionally informed about the low accuracy of machine predictions. The decision to grant bail is also unaffected by the warnings mandated by the Supreme Court if participants do not first decide without knowing the machine prediction. Oversampling cases where defendants committed violent crime does not change results either, whether coupled with machine predictions for general or for violent crime. Giving participants feedback and incentivizing them for finding ground truth has a small, weakly significant effect. The effect becomes significant at conventional levels when additionally using strong graphical warnings. Then participants are less likely to follow the advice. But the effect is counterproductive: they follow the advice less if it actually is closer to ground truth.
      PubDate: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab001
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Judge Shopping

    • Authors: Kahan M; McKenzie T.
      Pages: 341 - 379
      Abstract: AbstractWe examine related case rules, which are local rules adopted by federal district courts to determine whether a newly filed civil action will be assigned to a judge presiding over a previously filed similar case or a randomly chosen judge. Districts have adopted divergent approaches to the definition of “relatedness” as well as to the process for determining whether a case satisfies the definition. We analyze how these design choices affect the ability of parties to strategically manipulate case assignments to gain an advantage in litigation. We also propose suggestions for the optimal design of the assignment rules for related cases.
      PubDate: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab007
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Erratum to: Judges in the Lab: No Precedent Effects, No Common/Civil Law

    • Authors: Spamann H; Klöhn L, Jamin C, et al.
      Pages: 380 - 380
      Abstract: In the originally published version of this manuscript, there were several errors which have been corrected online.
      PubDate: Wed, 06 Oct 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab006
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • The Behavioral Elasticity of Tax Revenue

    • Authors: Hemel D; Weisbach D.
      Pages: 381 - 438
      Abstract: AbstractThis article presents a measure of the efficiency consequences of changes to tax policies that inform a wide range of tax law debates. Building upon recent extensions to the “elasticity of taxable income” concept, we clarify the relationship among revenue effects, administrative costs, and compliance costs. The resulting measure—the behavioral elasticity of tax revenue (BETR)—captures the change in total resources resulting from marginal changes in tax rates, the tax base, or tax enforcement. We illustrate the BETR’s utility through a series of case studies. We also show how the BETR can help policy makers select more efficient redistributive mechanisms.
      PubDate: Tue, 09 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab003
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Reassessing the Legislative Veto: The Statutory President, Foreign
           Affairs, and Congressional Workarounds

    • Authors: Bradley C.
      Pages: 439 - 501
      Abstract: AbstractA chief reason that the President is insufficiently constrained when exercising statutorily-delegated power, it is claimed, is the Supreme Court’s disallowance of legislative vetoes in its decision in INS v. Chadha, a claim that intensified during the Trump administration. This article challenges this account, arguing that the availability of the legislative veto was less important before Chadha to congressional-executive relations than legal scholars commonly assume, and that, to the extent that the legislative veto was (or would have become) important for checking some exercises of statutorily-delegated authority, Congress has developed a host of effective workarounds in the years since Chadha.
      PubDate: Tue, 09 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab008
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Democratizing the Senate from Within

    • Authors: Gould J; Shepsle K, Stephenson M.
      Pages: 502 - 557
      Abstract: AbstractThis article proposes that the U.S. Senate adopt a “popular-majoritarian cloture rule,” under which a motion to close debate and proceed to a final vote would carry if but only if supported by a majority of Senators who collectively represent a larger share of the population than those Senators in opposition. This rule, which would be a constitutional exercise of the Senate’s power to set the rules of its proceedings, would make the body more democratic and more functional, and would be preferable both to the current filibuster rule and to simple majority rule.
      PubDate: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab005
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • Distributing Attorney Fees in Multidistrict Litigation

    • Authors: Cheng E; Edelman P, Fitzpatrick B.
      Pages: 558 - 594
      Abstract: AbstractAs consolidated multidistrict litigation has come to dominate the federal civil docket, the problem of how to divide attorney fees among participating firms has become the source of frequent and protracted litigation. For example, in the National Football League (NFL) Concussion Litigation, the judge awarded the plaintiff attorneys over $100 million in fees, but the division of those fees among the twenty-six firms involved sparked two additional years of litigation. We explore solutions to this fee division problem, drawing insights from the economics, game theory, and industrial organization literatures. Ultimately, we propose a novel division method based on peer reports. Participating firms assess the relative contribution of other firms to the litigation, and then optimization or Bayesian techniques arrive at a consensus or compromise fee allocation. Our methods are intuitively easy to understand, enable broad participation, and are resistant to collusion or other strategic behavior, making them likely to be accepted by the firms involved. We thus provide courts with an important mediation tool or decision rule for these fee division disputes.
      PubDate: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laab002
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
  • How Many Cases Are Easy'

    • Authors: Fischman J.
      Pages: 595 - 656
      Abstract: AbstractBecause judges are expected to decide cases through the impartial application of existing law, they are often reluctant to admit that they must make law in hard cases. Many judges claim that such hard cases are rare, constituting roughly 10 percent of cases. In stark contrast, economic models of the selection of disputes for litigation predict that easy cases will settle, so that only hard cases would remain in trial and appellate courts. Empirical indicators, such as dissent rates or voting differences between Democratic and Republican appointees, have yielded muddled conclusions about the proportion of easy and hard cases in appellate courts. In fact, none of these crude statistics relate directly to the proportion of easy cases. This article develops a new approach for empirically analyzing the proportion of easy cases. Although the easiness and hardness of cases are subjective, it is possible to estimate feasible combinations of the proportion of hard cases and clear errors. This approach relies only on the basic premise that reasonable judges should not disagree in easy cases. The article then illustrates this approach using two datasets of appeals. An analysis of asylum appeals in the 9th Circuit finds widespread disagreement, implying high proportions of hard cases, clear errors, or both. By contrast, voting data from labor and environmental cases in the D.C. Circuit is consistent with the claim that 90 percent of cases are easy and 1 percent of decisions are clear errors.
      PubDate: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 00:00:00 GMT
      DOI: 10.1093/jla/laaa010
      Issue No: Vol. 13, No. 1 (2021)
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762

Your IP address:
Home (Search)
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-