We study whether federal judges’ personal exposure to financial fraud affects their professional behavior, in the form of sentencing outcomes in white‐collar cases. Following the methodology outlined in our registered report, we construct a novel measure of financial fraud exposure based on judges’ direct shareholdings in firms that commit financial fraud. Using this measure, we exploit the random assignment of cases to judges to examine whether judges exposed to fraud in one firm are (1) less likely to rule in favor of defendants in white‐collar cases involving other firms and (2) less likely to grant favorable pretrial motions to defendants. We find minimal evidence in support of either (1) or (2), concluding that for all but the most serious frauds, judges are unlikely to let their personal victimhood experience affect their professional sentencing behavior with respect to related cases. Our study broadens our understanding of the spillover effects of financial fraud enforcement and contributes to the literature on how judges’ personal experiences can shape judicial decision‐making.

中文翻译：

---

法官个人遭受金融欺诈对白领犯罪的量刑有何影响？


我们研究了联邦法官个人遭受金融欺诈是否会影响他们的职业行为，以白领案件的量刑结果的形式。根据我们的注册报告中概述的方法，我们根据法官在金融欺诈公司的直接持股情况构建了一种新的金融欺诈风险衡量标准。使用这一衡量标准，我们利用将案件随机分配给法官来检查一家公司中面临欺诈风险的法官是否 （1） 在涉及其他公司的白领案件中不太可能做出有利于被告的裁决，以及 （2） 不太可能批准对被告有利的审前动议。我们发现支持 （1） 或 （2） 的证据最少，得出的结论是，除了最严重的欺诈之外，法官不太可能让他们的个人受害者经历影响他们对相关案件的专业量刑行为。我们的研究拓宽了我们对金融欺诈执法溢出效应的理解，并为有关法官个人经历如何影响司法决策的文献做出了贡献。