Researchers at NYU and Harvard University found that federal judges are more likely to appeal rulings made by peers from their opposing political party, regardless of whether the case relates to any political ideology.

In the study, researchers documented the political affiliations of judges — based on the political parties of the presidents who nominated them — who ruled over 400,000 cases in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals from 1985 to 2020. They found an ongoing increase in polarization, which they defined as panels’ consistent appeals to rulings from judges with opposing political affiliations. 

NYU Wagner professor Rajeev Dehejia, who co-authored the paper with Harvard Law School professor Alma Cohen, said that one of the study’s main findings was that polarization was prominent both in cases with ties to political ideology — such as cases relating to abortion rights or gun control — and without. In an interview with WSN, Dehejia said he felt these differing interpretations indicated judges’ deeply rooted alignment with their political parties. 

“Even in non-ideological cases, you have this political cohesion that is occurring,” Dehijia said in an interview with WSN. “We believe that this is genuine political polarization, and not just a divergence of judicial philosophies between Republicans and Democrats.” 

Researchers categorized the cases by whether they took place before or after 2000, and stressed an increase in polarization in more recent rulings. Post-2000 panels with three democratic judges were 13.4 percentage points more likely to appeal a ruling from a Republican judge, adjusted to 6.7 for panels with one Republican and two Democrats, and 2.5 for two Republicans and one Democrat.

Dehejia emphasized that federal appellate judges are randomly assigned to cases without consideration of how their political affiliations par with others on the panel. 

“There are a few circuits that are heavily tilted one way or the other, but most circuits have a blend of Republicans and Democrats,” Dehejia said. “By the roll of the dice, who shows up in a panel is going to tilt the outcome one way or the other.”

Contact Sydney Chan at [email protected].