After attending economics training, judges use more economics language, render more conservative verdicts in economics cases, rule against regulatory agencies more often, & render longer criminal sentences

Ideas Have Consequences:  The Impact of Law and Economics on American Justice. Elliott Ash, Daniel L. Chen, Suresh Naidu. July 16, 2018, http://elliottash.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/ash-chen-naidu-2018-07-15.pdf

Abstract: This paper provides a quantitative analysis of the effects of the law and economics movement on the U.S. judiciary. Using the universe of published opinions in U.S. Circuit Courts and 1 million District Court criminal sentencing decisions linked to judge identity, we estimate the effect of attendance in the controversial Manne economics training program, an intensive two-week course attended by almost half of federal judges. After attending economics training, participating judges use more economics language, render more conservative verdicts in economics cases, rule against regulatory agencies more often, and render longer criminal sentences. These results are robust to adjusting for a wide variety of covariates that predict the timing of attendance. Comparing non-Manne and Manne judges prior to program start and exploiting variation in instructors further assuage selection concerns. Non-Manne judges randomly exposed to Manne peers on previous cases increase their use of economics language in subsequent opinions, suggesting economic ideas diffused throughout the judiciary. Variation in topic ordering finds that economic ideas were portable from regulatory to criminal cases.

Keywords: Judicial Decision-Making, Ideology, Intellectual History.
JEL codes: D7, K0, Z1