Diversity Jurisdiction and Out-of-State Bias: Experimental Evidence

Abstract

Since the founding, U.S. federal courts have had jurisdiction over cases between citizens of different states. This diversity jurisdiction is primarily justified by concern that state courts might be biased against out-of-state litigants. For at least one hundred years, however, this justification for diversity jurisdiction has been questioned by federal judges and distinguished academics, who have doubted whether such a bias continues to exist or ever existed. This paper contains experimental tests of the existence and extent of bias against out-of-state litigants. Analysis suggests some bias against out-of-state defendants, especially when parties’ residence is salient (emphasized).