Courts, Crime, and Consequences: Using Administrative Data to Estimate Causal Effects of Court Interactions

Session Submission Type: Panel

Abstract

This session presents new empirical work exploring how interactions with courts, incarceration, and legal representation shape individual outcomes and generate spillover effects on families and institutions. Using high-quality administrative data and rigorous causal identification strategies, each paper examines questions central to understanding the justice system impacts on equity, well-being, and institutional integrity, in the United States and internationally.

The first paper, by Sarah Font and Ezra Goldstein, uses a judge-based instrumental variables design and linked administrative data from Wisconsin to estimate the causal effects of parental incarceration on children’s developmental, educational, health, and criminal justice outcomes. Exploiting quasi-random variation in sentencing due to judge assignment, the authors identify the impact of incarceration on a wide array of child outcomes, with additional analyses exploring intermediate mechanisms, changes in household composition, and mitigating circumstances.

In the second paper  Pauline Leung and Duan Zhang examine the individual and familial consequences of involuntary job loss using linked Census employment and justice records. Focusing on mass layoff events as exogenous shocks, the authors estimate the causal effects of unemployment on crime, including spillover effects on family members. The paper explores heterogeneity by demographic characteristics and criminal history, providing insight into how economic dislocation interacts with criminal behavior.

The third paper, by Nitin Kumar Bharti and Jonathan Lehne, evaluates the roll-out of legal aid clinics in Indian prisons. Using a staggered difference-in-differences design, the study finds that access to legal aid improves case outcomes for defendants—raising the likelihood of early dismissal and acquittal—and reduces the overall prison population. The paper quantifies significant cost-benefit gains, highlighting legal aid as an effective intervention to improve access to justice and reduce unnecessary incarceration.

Finally, the fourth paper, by Suhyeon Oh, investigates the relationship between judicial discretion and campaign contributions in Texas. A judicial reform that restricted nonrandom attorney assignments led to a measurable decline in contributions from attorneys to judges, consistent with quid pro quo dynamics. Importantly, the reform did not reduce attorney effectiveness, suggesting that previous assignment patterns may have facilitated corruption without diminishing legal quality.

Together, these papers illuminate how courts and legal institutions affect individuals, families, and broader public systems—through both formal decisions and informal incentives—with implications for public efficiency, accountability, and policy design.

Policy Area

• Crime, Justice, and Drugs

Secondary Policy Area

• Family and Child Policy

Chair

• Amanda Yvonne Agan, Cornell University

Discussants

• Aria Golestani, Cornell University

• Amanda Yvonne Agan, Cornell University

Organizer

• Ezra G. Goldstein, Georgia Institute of Technology

Individual Presentations

• The Causal Effects of Parental Incarceration on Child Wellbeing: Evidence from a Judge Design - Presenting Author: Ezra G. Goldstein, Georgia Institute of Technology

• Job Loss and Crime - Presenting Author: Duan Zhang, University of Missouri-Columbia

• Justice for all? The Impact of Legal Aid in India - Presenting Author: NITIN KUMAR BHARTI, University of Western Australia

• Does discretion in defense attorney assignment by elected judges benefit defendants or judges? - Presenting Author: Suhyeon Oh, Texas A&M University