Get More Great Stuff!

Join over 120,000 subscribers! Get a free weekly update with exclusive content.
No spam, ever. Enter your email here:

Do hungry judges give harsher sentences?

 

Are judicial rulings based solely on laws and facts? Legal formalism holds that judges apply legal reasons to the facts of a case in a rational, mechanical, and deliberative manner. In contrast, legal realists argue that the rational application of legal reasons does not sufficiently explain the decisions of judges and that psychological, political, and social factors influence judicial rulings. We test the common caricature of realism that justice is “what the judge ate for breakfast” in sequential parole decisions made by experienced judges. We record the judges’ two daily food breaks, which result in segmenting the deliberations of the day into three distinct “decision sessions.” We find that the percentage of favorable rulings drops gradually from ≈65% to nearly zero within each decision session and returns abruptly to ≈65% after a break. Our findings suggest that judicial rulings can be swayed by extraneous variables that should have no bearing on legal decisions.

Source: “Extraneous factors in judicial decisions” from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Join 25K+ readers. Get a free weekly update via email here.

Related posts:

When does the sex of a judge affect their rulings?

Are lawyers any good at predicting the outcomes of their cases?

You just committed murder. What should you do now?

About Eric Barker