Clash of norms Judicial leniency on defendant birthdays1 Daniel L. Chen Arnaud Philippe Abstract We document judicial leniency on defendant birthdays across 5 million decisions. Our results are consistent with reference-dependent social preferences. First, French sentences are 1% fewer and around 5% shorter. Second, U.S. federal judges also round down sentences except when rounding up makes available sentencing reductions for good behavior. No leniency appears on the days before or after a defendant’s birthday. Judges’ experience and economic reasoning seem to mitigate the effect, consistent with isolating a judicial channel. 1. Introduction Individuals frequently have to evaluate others’ productions, acts or personhood. In professional settings, those evaluations usually have to be done in an impartial way. Professors marking exams, loan officers evaluating demands, judges deciding cases are supposed to follow precise rules and to only evaluate some defined material. While they are supposed to be independent, surrounding norms could affect those evaluations. National or religious holidays, birthday of the evaluated person, birth or death of one of the person’s relatives could change the evaluators’ judgment. 1 Daniel L. Chen,
[email protected], Toulouse School of Economics, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse, France;
[email protected], LWP, Harvard Law School. Arnaud Philippe,
[email protected], Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, Toulouse School of Economics, University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse, France. First draft: June 2017. Current draft: June 2018. Latest version at: http://users.nber.org/~dlchen/papers/Clash_of_Norms.pdf. Work on this project was conducted while Chen received financial support from the European Research Council (Grant No.