Legal Uncertainty and Circuit Splits in the US Courts of Appeals

• In Event: US Courts of Appeals: The Appellate Work Horses of the Federal Judiciary

Abstract

Circuit courts in the United States come to conflicting decisions on the same legal question, creating federal law that varies by geography. While the consequences of non-uniformity are well studied, the process that generates these divergent decisions is not. In this paper, I develop a model of sequential judicial decision-making where courts learn about and rule on new legal issues. Using an original data set of decisions on issues of “first impression,” I test predictions from the model. I find that the effect of ideological distance between courts depends on whether previous decisions are consistent with known court biases. Bias-consistent decisions result in an ally principle, where ideological distance increases the likelihood of a circuit split. However, when courts make bias-inconsistent decisions, ideological distance increases the chances of legal uniformity. I disentangle this effect into both a private and public learning mechanism. My analysis provides both a theoretical and empirical foundation for understanding when we should expect circuit splits to occur.

Author

• Anthony Taboni, Princeton University