{"id":2347,"date":"2011-04-20T09:33:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-20T13:33:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/?p=2347"},"modified":"2016-11-16T20:44:45","modified_gmt":"2016-11-17T01:44:45","slug":"justice-is-now-how-recently-the-judge-ate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/justice-is-now-how-recently-the-judge-ate\/","title":{"rendered":"Justice is (now) \u201chow recently the judge ate\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>According to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.economist.com\/node\/18557594\" target=\"_blank\">The Economist<\/a> (and <a href=\"http:\/\/news.google.com\/news\/more?pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=us&amp;cf=all&amp;ncl=dI5wWox8wCwUhiMco2Lu6sGrGz-3M\" target=\"_blank\">others<\/a>), the old adage &#8220;what the judge ate for breakfast&#8221; should instead be &#8220;how recently the judge ate.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>We\u2019ve probably all heard that justice is \u201cwhat the judge ate for breakfast.\u201d Although typically invoked to explain to a confused 1L the inexplicably divergent outcomes in otherwise indistinguishable cases (if I may unscientifically extrapolate from personal experience), this caricature of <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Legal_realism\" target=\"_blank\">legal realism<\/a> might actually have some merit.\u00a0 Researchers have <a href=\"http:\/\/lsolum.typepad.com\/files\/danziger-levav-avnaim-pnas-2011.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">discovered<\/a> that meals, or in the very least breaks, might very well determine a litigant\u2019s fate. (<a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jerome_Frank_(lawyer)\" target=\"_blank\">Judge Jerome Frank<\/a> of the Second Circuit, often credited for this candid \u201cbreakfast theory,\u201d would be proud. Perhaps even <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Oliver_Wendell_Holmes,_Jr.\" target=\"_blank\">Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes<\/a> would feel some satisfaction. For a cynical view, see a <a href=\"http:\/\/notabug.com\/kozinski\/breakfast\" target=\"_blank\">speech<\/a> by Ninth Circuit <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Alex_Kozinski\" target=\"_blank\">Chief Judge Alex Kozinski<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<p>To be clear, the researchers discovered that it wasn\u2019t so much <em>what<\/em> the judge ate but rather <em>when<\/em> the judge ate (relative to the determination). Nonetheless, this study is obviously troubling. According to the research, your chances of success hinge quite significantly on a wholly arbitrary factor: how recently your decisionmaker ate or took a break. Remarkably, in this case it wasn\u2019t the individual\u2019s underlying crime, time served, gender, or ethnicity. It was, scientifically speaking, the temporal proximity to the meal or break.<\/p>\n<p>Studying over 1,000 judicial rulings by eight Jewish-Israeli judges presiding over two different parole boards, the study reaches this conclusion. And we\u2019re not referring to minor disparities. Take a look at the <a href=\"http:\/\/cdn.physorg.com\/newman\/gfx\/news\/2011\/justice.jpg\" target=\"_blank\">graph<\/a> \u2014 when would you like <em>your<\/em> claim heard? As graphically depicted, your chances could drop from approximately 65% to practically 0% \u2014 all depending on <em>when<\/em>, not <em>what<\/em>. If that ain\u2019t troubling, well, what\u2019s the point of the hearing?<\/p>\n<p>Is the lesson of this study that litigants should feed judges? Probably not, but I suppose it would help your chances.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>According to The Economist (and others), the old adage &#8220;what the judge ate for breakfast&#8221; should instead be &#8220;how recently [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":48,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":true,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,44,45],"tags":[64,326,346,411,506],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-2347","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-amicus","category-courts","category-criminal-justice","tag-adjudication","tag-jurisprudence","tag-legal-realism","tag-parole","tag-social-science"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZrWS-BR","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2347","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/48"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2347"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2347\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2347"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2347"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2347"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/crcl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=2347"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}