IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/empleg/v3y2006i3p497-524.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Law, Ideology, and Strategy in Judicial Decision Making: Evidence from Securities Fraud Actions

Author

Listed:
  • Michael A. Perino

Abstract

Legal academics and political scientists continue to debate whether the legal, attitudinal, or strategic model best explains judicial decision making. One limitation in this debate is the high‐court bias found in most studies. This article, by contrast, examines federal district court decisions, specifically interpretations of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Initial interpretations of the Act articulated distinct liberal and conservative positions. The data compiled here support the hypothesis that the later emergence of an intermediate interpretation was the result of strategic statutory interpretation rather than simply judges acting consistently with their ideological preferences, although there is some evidence that judges adopting the most conservative interpretation of the Act were acting consistently with the attitudinal model. There is weaker evidence to support the legal model, an unsurprising result given the severe test the study design creates for that model.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael A. Perino, 2006. "Law, Ideology, and Strategy in Judicial Decision Making: Evidence from Securities Fraud Actions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3), pages 497-524, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:3:y:2006:i:3:p:497-524
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2006.00077.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2006.00077.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2006.00077.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Douglas Cumming & Na Dai, 2009. "Capital Flows and Hedge Fund Regulation," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 848-873, December.
    2. Christina L. Boyd, 2015. "The Hierarchical Influence of Courts of Appeals on District Courts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 113-141.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:3:y:2006:i:3:p:497-524. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1740-1461 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.