Emotional Regulation and Judicial Behavior

Emotional Regulation and Judicial Behavior

Judges are human and experience emotion when hearing cases, though the standard account of judging long has denied that fact. In the post-realist era it is possible to acknowledge that judges have emotional reactions to their work, yet our legal culture continues to insist that a good judge firmly puts those reactions aside. Thus, we expect judges to regulate their emotions, either by preventing emotion’s emergence or by walling off its influence. But judges are given precisely no direction as to how to engage in emotional regulation.

This Article proposes a model for judicial emotion regulation that goes beyond a blanket admonition to “put emotion aside.” While legal discourse on judicial emotion has been stunted, scientific study of the processes of emotion regulation has been robust. By bringing these literatures together for the first time, the Article reveals that our legal culture does nothing to promote intelligent judicial emotion regulation and much to discourage it.


More in this Issue


This Essay explores a question of superficial triviality: when sports use instant replay technology to review on-field calls, what standard of review should they employ? The conventional view is that on-field calls should be entrenched against reversal such that, if there viewing official has any doubt about the correctness of the initial call, he must […]

Moving the Virtual Border to the Cellular Level: Mandatory DNA Testing and the U.S. Refugee Family Reunification Program

Should the United States impose a genetic definition of “family “on refugees seeking to reunite with their families? This Comment chronicles the birth of DNA testing in the U.S. Refugee Family Reunification (Priority Three, or P-3) Program. It explores the inception of new rules that will require DNA testing for individuals processed as Priority Three […]

Debt Collection in the Information Age: New Technologies and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

Debt collectors are increasingly using internet and mobile technologies as part of the debt collection process. While these technologies may provide conveniences for collectors and consumers alike, they also create the potential for new forms of deception and raise novel privacy concerns. Much of the problem lies in the failure to update the Fair Debt […]

Climate Regulation and the Limits of Cost-Benefit Analysis

Over the past two years U.S. regulatory agencies have issued fourteen regulations that take into account the effect of industrial activities and products on the global climate. The regulatory activity so far has already set precedents on which future regulation will rest. Yet despite the potentially momentous consequences, it has received no comment in the […]

Hybridizing Jurisdiction

Federal jurisdiction-the “power” of the court-is seen as something separate and unique, with a litany of special effects that define jurisdictionality as the antipode of nonjurisdictionality. The resulting conceptualization is that jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality occupy mutually exclusive theoretical and doctrinal space. In a recent Article, I refuted this rigid dichotomy of jurisdictionality and nonjurisdictionality by […]