The current study examines how key internal U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) policy changes have been translated into front-line prosecutorial practices. Extending courts-as-communities scholarship and research on policy implementation practices, we use U.S. Sentencing Commission data from 2004 to 2019 to model outcomes for several measures of prose- cutorial discretion in federal drug trafficking cases, including the use of mandatory minimum charges and prosecutor-endorsed departures, to test the impact of the policy changes on case processing outcomes. We contrast prosecutorial measures with measures that are more impervious to discretionary manipulation, such as criminal history, and those that represent judicial and blended discretion, including judicial departures and final sentence lengths. We find a significant effect of the policy reforms on how prosecutorial tools are used across DOJ policy periods, and we find variation across districts as a function of contextual conditions, consistent with the court communities literature. We also find that a powerful driver of changes in pros- ecutorial practices during our most recent period is the confirmation of individual Trump-appointed U.S. Attorneys at the district level, suggesting an important theoretical place for midlevel actors in policy translation and implementation.
more »
« less
PRESIDE: A Judge Entity Recognition and Disambiguation Model for US District Court Records
The docket sheet of a court case contains a wealth of information about the progression of a case, the parties’ and judge’s decision-making along the way, and the case’s ultimate outcome that can be used in analytical applications. However, the unstructured text of the docket sheet and the terse and variable phrasing of docket entries require the development of new models to identify key entities to enable analysis at a systematic level. We developed a judge entity recognition language model and disambiguation pipeline for US District Court records. Our model can robustly identify mentions of judicial entities in free text (~99% F-1 Score) and outperforms general state-of-the-art language models by 13%. Our disambiguation pipeline is able to robustly identify both appointed and non-appointed judicial actors and correctly infer the type of appointment (~99% precision). Lastly, we show with a case study on in forma pauperis decision-making that there is substantial error (~30%) attributing decision outcomes to judicial actors if the free text of the docket is not used to make the identification and attribution.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2033604
- PAR ID:
- 10352507
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data)
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 2721 to 2728
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
How do judges decide issues of equality? While prior scholarship demonstrates that judicial attributes such as partisan identification, gender, race, age, and career backgrounds help elucidate judicial decision-making, considerably less attention has been devoted to how judicial empathy may influence or condition judicial decision-making. Such scholarly attention is especially lacking in the study of courts outside of the United States. To bridge this critical gap, we examine how judicial empathy affects decision-making behavior by analyzing data from the Supreme Court of Canada from 1982 to 2015. We find compelling evidence that trailblazer women’s unique personal experiences exert a strong influence on judicial behavior within the Canadian Supreme Court. In fact, our findings demonstrate that the effects of judicial empathy extend across a broader array of discrimination cases in Canada compared to previous findings on the American courts. We find that trailblazer women have a greater propensity to vote in favor of discrimination claimants compared to their male peers. Normatively, these effects manifest as judicial empathy in discrimination cases where trailblazers themselves likely faced upward mobility challenges.more » « less
-
Entity linking is the task of linking mentions of named entities in natural language text, to entities in a curated knowledge-base. This is of significant importance in the biomedical domain, where it could be used to semantically annotate a large volume of clinical records and biomedical literature, to standardized concepts described in an ontology such as Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). We observe that with precise type information, entity disambiguation becomes a straightforward task. However, fine-grained type information is usually not available in biomedical domain. Thus, we propose LATTE, a LATent Type Entity Linking model, that improves entity linking by modeling the latent fine-grained type information about mentions and entities. Unlike previous methods that perform entity linking directly between the mentions and the entities, LATTE jointly does entity disambiguation, and latent fine-grained type learning, without direct supervision. We evaluate our model on two biomedical datasets: MedMentions, a large scale public dataset annotated with UMLS concepts, and a de-identified corpus of dictated doctor’s notes that has been annotated with ICD concepts. Extensive experimental evaluation shows our model achieves significant performance improvements over several state-of-the-art techniques.more » « less
-
Different entities with the same name can be difficult to distinguish. Handling confusing entity mentions is a crucial skill for language models (LMs). For example, given the question “Where was Michael Jordan educated?” and a set of documents discussing different people named Michael Jordan, can LMs distinguish entity mentions to generate a cohesive answer to the question? To test this ability, we introduce a new benchmark, AmbigDocs. By leveraging Wikipedia’s disambiguation pages, we identify a set of documents, belonging to different entities who share an ambiguous name. From these documents, we generate questions containing an ambiguous name and their corresponding sets of answers. Our analysis reveals that current state-of-the-art models often yield ambiguous answers or incorrectly merge information belonging to different entities. We establish an ontology categorizing four types of incomplete answers and automatic evaluation metrics to identify such categories. We lay the foundation for future work on reasoning across multiple documents with ambiguous entities.more » « less
-
Given their place within the judicial hierarchy, judges on lower courts face a complex array of challenges including heavy caseloads, mandatory dockets, and the threat of Supreme Court reversal. Despite the extensive scholarship on the American courts, little is known about judicial interactions in comparative contexts. We articulate and evaluate a framework for lower court adherence to Supreme Court precedents by leveraging a cross-national design in three countries—Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States—with similar systems but meaningful institutional variability. We find that the mechanisms promulgating adherence to Supreme Court precedents do not substantially vary across design or institutional context. Instead, our results demonstrate that legal factors exert a consistent, homogeneous effect on lower court compliance across judicial systems. Our work offers new and important implications for studies on law and courts and comparative institutions, more broadly.more » « less
An official website of the United States government

