In October 2025, over 225 scholars gathered at Georgetown Law for the 19th Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies (CELS). CELS is the leading forum for the presentation and discussion of empirical research on topics related to the law. CELS includes scholars from such wide-ranging fields as law, economics, accounting, criminology, finance, political science, and psychology. The eight papers included in this special issue of the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies (JELS) represent a small sample of the more than 125 papers presented at CELS-Georgetown Law. They cover a variety of topics ranging from corporate sustainability disclosures to evaluations of disciplinary actions against lawyers—with stops along the way for articles on eviction reduction policies, building a new jury system, AI and judging, Congressional hearings, and nursing home quality ratings. Collectively, these papers illustrate the ways in which empirical research can cast light on a variety of legal topics, as well as the hard work and modesty necessary to do such research well. We thank the presenters, discussants, area organizers, reviewers, the event staff at Georgetown Law, and the editorial team at JELS for making the 19th annual CELS and this special issue possible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hyman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: