Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Extension: A Tale of Two Studies: Revisiting the Unintended Effects of Staggered Legal Changes

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    Post-2003 methodological innovations in causal inference suggest that many older studies investigating the unintended effects of legal changes need reappraisal. In particular, new difference-in-differences estimators have been proposed recently in settings with staggered adoption that allow for treatment effect heterogeneity across groups and dynamic treatment effects that may grow or dissipate over time. These are common to most legal changes occurring at the state level in the United States. We provide a practitioner-oriented overview of those methodological developments, followed by two empirical illustrations. We first revisit a study that finds that abortion legalization led to an increase in sexually transmitted diseases. Second, we revisit an analysis claiming that three-strikes laws caused an increase in homicides. While we find that the conclusions of the second study are robust, we show that some of the conclusions of the first one are sensitive to the new methodological developments.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)519-575
    Number of pages57
    JournalJournal of Legal Studies
    Volume54
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jun. 2025

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
      SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
    2. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
      SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

    ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

    • Law

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Extension: A Tale of Two Studies: Revisiting the Unintended Effects of Staggered Legal Changes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this