The Statistical Analysis of Judicial Decisions and Legal Rules with Classification Trees

Jonathan Kastellec

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies · 2010 · 74 citations · 44 references

Concepts

TL;DR

The structure of the relationship between case facts and judicial outcomes is a central question, and legal doctrine seeks to define this relationship. This article aims to summarize and apply the relatively unexplored statistical method of classification trees to study legal doctrine. The authors illustrate the method by conducting classification tree analyses of U.S. Supreme Court search‑and‑seizure cases and appellate confession cases.

Abstract

A key question in the quantitative study of legal rules and judicial decision making is the structure of the relationship between case facts and case outcomes. Legal doctrine and legal rules are general attempts to define this relationship. This article summarizes and utilizes a statistical method relatively unexplored in political science and legal scholarship—classification trees—that offers a flexible way to study legal doctrine. I argue that this method, while not replacing traditional statistical tools for studying judicial decisions, can better capture many aspects of the relationship between case facts and case outcomes. To illustrate the method's advantages, I conduct classification tree analyses of search and seizure cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court and confession cases decided by the courts of appeals. These analyses illustrate the ability of classification trees to increase our understanding of legal rules and legal doctrine.

References

44