Item

Abstract

Discussing two recent landmark US antitrust cases on a blog at the Stigler Center in Chicago, economists worried about “economic evidence” providing “false certainty that leads courts astray.” At the same time, we find legal scholars hoping that future generations may be “more persuaded by empirical evidence and less persuaded by argumentation.” What is it that makes “economic evidence” so attractive to a legal audience? This talk reviews some basics of economic and legal methodology and explores why transplanting economic thought into the legal realm may seem particularly appealing. The promise of measurability such an economic transplant holds will be viewed through the eyes of legislators and the judiciary. Whenever economic transplants come into play, we are witnessing a power shift from normative decision-making to expert analysis. The talk concludes with an agenda for further research.