Abstract
Introduction Our colleagues in the social sciences have been applying quantitative measures and statistical techniques to study the courts, judges, and other legal institutions for more than half a century. 1 By contrast, for decades, scholars in the legal academy who devoted themselves to empirical 2 analysis of the law and legal institutions were relatively few, and the published yield was fairly modest. Only twenty years ago, Professor Peter Schuck was moved to ask "Why Don't Law Professors Do More Empirical Research?" 3 Less than ten years ago, Professor Michael Heise still had occasion to lament "The (Relative) Dearth of Empirical Legal Scholarship." 4 When writing those regretful words, however, Professor Heise observed that change appeared to be coming and that empirical research was "continuing to emerge and at an increasingly rapid rate." 5 In the past decade, the pace of empirical legal study has quickened, and the publication of empirical studies in law journals has increased. 6 Within just a few short years, empirical study of the law in general, and in particular of the courts, has risen to a level of prominence in American law schools. Indeed, more than one law school, including the home of this law review, has aspired to lead the national legal academy in the pursuit of empirical legal scholarship. 7 Thus, as we look at the research scene today, what Professor Theodore Eisenberg has called "the thirst for systematic knowledge of the legal system" 8 is more likely to be quenched ...