Policy Judgments Research Articles

Planning, Discretion, and Judicial Intervention: Recent Discussions and Institutional Changes in the UK and Role of Court on Planning

In many jurisdictions, the planning authority has considerable discretion at all stages of the interpretation, implementation, and application of urban planning. The courts or judiciaries of many countries take a deferential view of administrative agencies’planning judgments or decisions for reasons such as a lack of expertise in policy judgments on urban planning. However, planning is not free from judicial or statutory review from the perspective of the rule of law, and it is necessary to secure the legitimacy of urban planning and related administrative actions or decisions. Nevertheless, it is not easy to consider the extent to which the courts or judiciary can intervene in urban planning and policy-related issues and what institutional processes can be conceived for that. The relatively recent trends in the UK in the 2010s can be referred to for these issues. First, in terms of the substantial aspect, the UK Supreme Courtin its 2012 Tesco v Dundee ruling ruled that the interpretation of urban planning should be conducted from an objective perspective, considering the appropriate context, and explicitly declared that the interpretation of urban planning or planning policies was also a matter of law. Considering the characteristics of the UK planning law system, which is often represented by discretionary planning permission and the nationalization of development rights, this change in the court’s position has had a considerable impact on the trend of appeals against planning decisions and has prompted subsequent discussions on the scope and legal principles of court intervention in urban planning. Second, in terms of the procedural aspect, the UK introduced the Planning Court under the High Court in 2014, which has shortened the hearing timetable for important planning cases and has specialized planning judges hear them. This attempt is evaluated positively to some extent. Such discussions have not yet been fully introduced outside of the UK, not only in Korea but also in other countries. Hence, this study critically examines these discussions in the UKand derives implications that can be referenced from our perspective and system.

Reminders of Japanese redress increase Asian American support for Black reparations

Informational interventions can shape policy attitudes, and in this study, we examined whether largely unknown information about past reparations payments toward one minoritized group would shape current policy judgments. In 1942, the U.S. government wrongfully relocated and imprisoned more than 120,000 Japanese Americans. In 1988, the government apologized and offered $20,000 USD in reparations payments. Japanese American redress is a recent, but not widely known, concrete example of communities who have successfully fought for reparative economic action. In two preregistered studies of online crowdsourced panels of Asian Americans (N = 329, N = 500), an intervention that raised awareness of this history of incarceration and redress increased support for reparations for Black Americans, relative to a control condition, and national polling data on support for reparations. Exploratory analyses revealed that the degree of learning about Japanese American redress in the intervention explained its impact on support for Black reparations. Future research should target representative samples to understand how education about past redress within one’s own social group affects support for reparative economic justice for others.

Bioacoustic monitoring to determine addiction levels of primates to the human sphere: A feasibility study on Japanese macaques.

Some nonhuman primate species, whose original habitats have been reclaimed by artificial activities, have acquired boldness toward humans which is evident based on the diminished frequency of escape behaviors. Eventually, such species have become regular users of human settlements, and are referred to as "urban primates." Considering this, we developed a noninvasive technique based on bioacoustics to provide a transparent assessment of troop addiction levels in anthropogenic environments, which are determined by the dependence on agricultural crops and human living sphere for their diets and daily ranging, respectively. We attempted to quantify the addiction levels based on the boldness of troops when raiding settlements, characterized by a "landscape of fear" because of the presence of humans as predators. We hypothesized that the boldness of troops could be measured using two indices: the frequency of raiding events on settlements and the amount of time spent there. For hypothesis testing, we devised an efficient method to measure these two indices using sound cues (i.e., spontaneous calls) for tracing troop movements that are obtainable throughout the day from most primate species (e.g., contact calls). We conducted a feasibility study of this assessment procedure, targeting troops of Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata). For this study, we collected 346 recording weeks of data using autonomous recorders from 24 troops with different addiction levels during the nonsnowy seasons. The results demonstrated that troops that reached the threshold level, at which radical interventions including mass culling of troop members is officially permitted, could be readily identified based on the following behavioral characteristics: troop members raiding settlements two or three times per week and mean time spent in settlements per raiding event exceeding 0.4 h. Thus, bioacoustic monitoring could become a valid option to ensure the objectivity of policy judgment in urban primate management.

국가교육과정 수립․변경의 법적 구조와 과제

Purpose: This study aims to examine the legal structure of the establishment and change of the national curriculum and to explore future tasks. Method: The research method used for this study was centered on literature research, and a method of supporting the contents of the interview was used for necessary matters. Results: In the establishment and change of the national curriculum, this study was requested to supplement the legal system, divide roles between committees and prepare a cooperative system, and specify models and methodologies for social consensus. Conclusion: In conclusion, this study suggested that it is necessary to find ways to improve tasks following the review of the legal structure of the establishment and change of the national curriculum, distinguish legal and policy judgments, and reorganize institutional regulations that can be curriculum-oriented.

제주녹지국제병원 판결과 관련한 제반 쟁점에 관한 분석

Since 2004, when discussions on for-profit hospitals began in earnest, there has been a sharp controversy over whether or not to grant permission. Greenland International Medical Center is the first case of dispute over permission to open a for-profit hospital, and it is meaningful in that it explains the relationship between Korea’s medical system and permission for a for-profit hospital. In this case, permission for a for-profit hospital was granted on the condition that treatment was prohibited for locals, and the possibility of adding such a subordiante clause depended on whether the permission for a for-profit hospital was a permission or a patent. In the first trial, it was judged to the effect that the permission of a for-profit hospital obtained by attaching a subordiante clause was illegal, even though it was regarded as the permission of a medical institution and a subordiante clause could not be attached to an act of detention or discretionary detention. On the other hand, in the second trial, it was judged that the license for a for-profit hospital should be regarded as patent in Korea’s medical system, which adopts the mandatory designation system for medical institutions, so a subordiante clause could also be attached, and the subordiante clause restricting the treatment of locals was legitimate. However, if a for-profit hospital is recognized as an exception in the medical system of Korea, which adpots the mandatory designation system for medical institutions, there is room for the nature of the permission to be judged differently. In cases where interest are acute, such as this case, deliberative democracy is being adopted, and this deliberative democracy is considered a desirable direction for modern administration in that in enables administrative agencies to listen to various opinions in exercising their discretionary power. However, deliberative democracy should not be completely relied on for legal judgements, and administrative agencies should not neglect their duty to make policy judgements by relying on deliberative democracy. In addition, issues that require policy discussion must be clear, and intersted parties need to be appropriately selected so that discussions can take place even at the national level.

일제 말기 '국민징용령'에 따른 조선인 노무동원의 시기와 실태

This article is an empirical review of the way Koreans were forcibly mobilized by issuing a conscription order during the Asia-Pacific War. In the meantime, the labor mobilization of Koreans following the issuance of the draft ordinance has been largely recognized as the Cabinet decision on August 8, 1944, and the application of general labor after September. According to the 1939 Labor Mobilization Plan, the “collective transfer” of Koreans was implemented in a way of recruitment, government arrangement, and recruitment. And each mobilization method was changed according to the policy judgment of the Japanese government’s cabinet decision. Recruitment in 1939, government mediation in 1942, and conscription in 1944 were all the results of such policy decisions. National draft was enacted in July 1939 under the enactment of the “National Service Draft Ordinance” and was implemented on October 1 of the same year in Joseon. However, it is recognized in existing studies that it was first invoked in 1944 after hesitating to invoke it out of fear of “national resistance” to the invocation of the conscription decree. This perception was almost uncritically accepted. There was no review of the reason for the delay until 1944. Can the gap from the enforcement of October 1, 1939 to the Cabinet decision of August 8, 1944 be explained by ‘national resistance’? The Japanese government was cautious from the beginning of the enactment, fearing that the invocation of the draft ordinance would disrupt the economy and bring about public resistance. Then, as the war situation worsened, the government strengthened the strong relocation of labor by expanding the target and clarifying the nationality. 1944 was the year when the largest expansion of private businesses was made to expand military supplies. On the other hand, the number of workers plunged to one-third of the previous year due to the provision of troops. Against this background, the Korean people’s invocation of the requisition order was necessary for strong labor relocation. This is the background of the 1944 announcement, known as “national resistance.” In addition, the invocation of the requisition order was already in effect before that, overshadowing the explanation that it was in accordance with the Cabinet decision on August 8, 1944. In fact, the Cabinet’s decision was nothing more than a policy decision that tolerated the reality that the draft ordinance had no choice but to be widely applied to relocate labor to a vast private workplace.

타인의 선거범죄에 의한 당선무효제도에 관한 헌법적 검토

Trials for election crimes function to punish criminal acts that infringe on the freedom of elections and undermine the fairness of elections. Indirectly, it restores the fairness of elections disturbed by election crimes. However, there are far more cases in which the result of an election is changed by punishment for election crimes than in cases where the result of an election is corrected through an election lawsuit. In particular, there are many constitutional problems with a system that uniformly invalidates elections only by sentences of imprisonment or fines of 3 million won or more for other people's election crimes, not their own. The invalidation of the election due to election crimes by others violates the constitutional principle of responsibility or self-responsibility, as well as due process of law, thereby violating the candidate's right to hold public office. Above all, it can impose a burden on judges to simultaneously consider the policy judgment on the invalidation of the elected candidate in sentencing for other people's election crimes, thereby damaging the unique function of the judiciary. Comparatively, the UK and Japan also recognize the invalidity of elections due to election crimes by others. However, apart from the criminal trial for election crimes, whether to invalidate the election due to election crimes is decided through the judgment of the election court or the court in charge of election litigation. These comparative legislative examples can support the argument that the election invalidation system under Articles 263 and 265 of the Public Official Election Act violates the due process of law and violates the candidate's right to hold public office. In order to overcome the unconstitutionality of the invalidation of elections due to election crimes by others, it is necessary to think about guaranteeing a separate procedure for invalidation of elections. Therefore, legislative improvement should be made in the direction of organizing a due process that can determine whether or not an election is invalid, separate from criminal trials for other people's election crimes.

Is Anthropogenic Global Warming Accelerating?

Abstract Estimates of the anthropogenic effective radiative forcing (ERF) trend have increased by 50% since 2000 (from +0.4 W m−2 decade−1 in 2000–09 to +0.6 W m−2 decade−1 in 2010–19), the majority of which is driven by changes in the aerosol ERF trend, as a result of aerosol emissions reductions. Here we study the extent to which observations of the climate system agree with these ERF assumptions. We use a large ERF ensemble from the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) to attribute the anthropogenic contributions to global mean surface temperature (GMST), top-of-atmosphere radiative flux, and we use aerosol optical depth observations. The GMST trend has increased from +0.18°C decade−1 in 2000–09 to +0.35°C decade−1 in 2010–19, coinciding with the anthropogenic warming trend rising from +0.19°C decade−1 in 2000–09 to +0.24°C decade−1 in 2010–19. This, as well as observed trends in top-of-atmosphere radiative fluxes and aerosol optical depths, supports the claim of an aerosol-induced temporary acceleration in the rate of warming. However, all three observation datasets additionally suggest that smaller aerosol ERF trend changes are compatible with observations since 2000, since radiative flux and GMST trends are significantly influenced by internal variability over this period. A zero-trend-change aerosol ERF scenario results in a much smaller anthropogenic warming acceleration since 2000 but is poorly represented in AR6’s ERF ensemble. Short-term ERF trends are difficult to verify using observations, so caution is required in predictions or policy judgments that depend on them, such as estimates of current anthropogenic warming trend, and the time remaining to, or the outstanding carbon budget consistent with, 1.5°C warming. Further systematic research focused on quantifying trends and early identification of acceleration or deceleration is required.

Developing a Core Value System - Foundation for Critical and Comprehensive Innovation of Vietnam's Education

Values and value systems are always hidden in the process of construction, existence, and development of all organizations at all levels and sizes. The education system also operates by the relationships and operating mechanisms of internal and external organizations, so each educational system always has a core value system, whether declared or not. This article applies the method of document research along with comments from long-term working experience in the education industry. Some findings show that Vietnam is in need of a value system that is both traditional and modern in order to adapt to the requirements of educational innovation and to meet international integration. In addition, more in-depth studies on both theory and application are needed to make accurate conclusions and policy judgments for an entire education system.

Social policy and the judicial making of Europe: capital, social mobilisation and minority social influence

AbstractThis article puts forward a cohesive narrative to explain the contribution of European social policy to the judicial making of Europe. By making a case for the inclusion of social policy as part of the discourse on the constitutional practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union, together with focusing on a socio-legal deconstruction of four seminal social policy judgments of the Court (Defrenne II, Von Colson, Harz and Francovich), the article undertakes a systematic approach to tracing the contribution of the field, and more specifically of its labour and non-discrimination law strands. To formulate its socio-legal analysis, the article adopts an explanatory framework, which draws on Bourdieu’s concepts of capital and field, the theory of legal mobilisation and Moscovici’s minority social influence, and which is applied to the selected judgments as a case-study. The framework enables the analysis to shed light on the dynamics between stakeholders in the social dimension of the European legal field and to persuasively showcase how social policy case-law, despite its sui generis dynamics, merits to have a place in the conversations surrounding the transformation of Europe.

From Four Horsemen to the Rule of Six: The Deconstruction of Judicial Deference

In its tumultuous 2022 term, the Supreme Court rebalanced the separation of powers, again. A tradition of self-restraint has evolved through case law and statutes when the judiciary reviews the actions of the other branches of government. The judiciary often accepts congressional judgments as to whether laws are necessary and proper and defers to executive agency interpretations of those congressional acts. The historical notion of judicial deference, however, earned criticism due to concerns about the potential unchecked decision-making power of unelected executive agency bureaucrats. The emerging alternative system might be worse. History offers parallels. During the New Deal, a core group of Supreme Court justices known as the “Four Horsemen” often struck down agency actions or legislative acts, apparently based upon their views of economic policy. But during the “Switch in Time that Saved Nine” that followed, a changing majority of the Court exercised judicial restraint, upholding policy judgments by Congress and the executive agencies. The clock seemingly rewound in 2022, as a new conservative majority of justices declared statutes insufficient and struck down agency actions, embracing a logic akin to their New Deal predecessors. By deconstructing judicial deference, these justices can now impose the Rule of Six and selectively choose the applicable interpretive doctrine to achieve their personally preferred policy outcomes. The fundamental question of American governance is “Who decides?”. In 2022, the unelected Supreme Court expanded its power over both unelected agency experts and elected officials. Inevitably, history will echo, and debates over court reforms will remerge. But for now, in our extraordinary era of emergencies, epidemics, and a climate crisis, six robed riders on horseback have appeared.

Securing Gun Rights by Statute: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Outside the Constitution

In popular and professional discourse, debate about the right to keep and bear arms most often revolves around the Second Amendment. But that narrow reference ignores a vast and expansive nonconstitutional legal regime privileging guns and their owners. This collection of nonconstitutional gun rights confers broad powers and immunities on gun owners that go far beyond those required by the Constitution, like rights to bring guns on private property against an owner’s wishes and to carry a concealed firearm in public with no training or background check. This Article catalogues this set of expansive laws and critically assesses them. Unlike the formal constitutional guarantee, this broad collection is not solely libertarian, concerned only with guaranteeing noninterference with a negative right. Instead, it is also aggressively interventionist, countermanding contrary policy judgments by employers, universities, property owners, and local government officials, conferring robust rights and privileges, and shifting the distribution of violence in society. This Article underscores the rhetorical and legal connection between this gun-rights expansionism and the formal Second Amendment guarantee. These laws do not derive from a judicial interpretation of the scope of the Constitution, but they are expressed and advocated for in constitutional terms. The Article also highlights how broad gun rights can create unique harm to the body politic and to marginalized groups by fostering fear and mistrust and empowering sometimes-problematic private actors to proactively police their own communities. Finally, the Article shows how gun-rights expansionism influences constitutional doctrine in the context of the Second Amendment, as well as of the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

The role of culture in the (re)production of inequalities of acceptable risk exposure: a case study in Singapore

The relationship between risk and inequality has become a key area of research and theoretical debate in sociology and risk studies more broadly. My aim in this paper is to explore the role culture plays in the (re)production of inequalities of risk exposure. More specifically, I examine the ways cultural systems shape and animate judgements about acceptable standards of risk exposure for different groups within a society. The case study examines divergent policy judgements about acceptable risk exposure to road accident injury and death between a group of temporary visa workers and all other private passengers in Singapore. A key objective of the paper is to demonstrate the conceptual and empirical utility of Mary Douglas’ cultural perspective for studying interconnections between risk and inequality. In particular, how taking up the problem of ‘risk acceptability’ is an effective way of approaching and studying the ways risk and inequality operate as mutually constitutive relations. In the discussion I show that what counts as risk and how acceptable or not risk is judged to be depends on the cultural system of classification used and the stratified social order it (re)produces. In the conclusion I consider the broader utility and significance of this critical approach for studying relations between risk and inequality through the problem of risk acceptability. A utility that may take on a particular significance in the present time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Leverage, Tata Kelola Perusahaan, dan Manajemen Laba Riil

Earnings management is conducted by key internal personels within a firm through the utility of accounting policy judgements which then mislead financial reports. The level of leverage and corporate governance have the ability to influence the degree of earnings management implementation. This research has an objective to examine the leverage and corporate governance mechanisms influence on real earnings management. This research population is included in 50 companies with the best corporate governance implementation in Indonesia for the period of 2012-2018. By using the purposive sampling method, 126 observations fit the sample criteria. This research uses a quantitative approach and secondary data with a random effects’ regression model. This research shows leverage and corporate governance mechanisms, when combined, affect real earnings management. This research's supplementary results show that leverage cannot limit real earnings management practice and consecutively on corporate governance mechanism. Independent board of commissioner negatively and significantly exert influence on real earnings management, followed by the audit committee, reducing real earnings management practice. Meanwhile, institutional and managerial ownership do not present a significant merit on real earnings management. This research implicates the policy maker in justifying good corporate governance and practioners to look upon the possibility of real activities manipulation.

Quality Science for Quality Decisions: Protecting the Scientific Integrity of Benefit–Cost Analysis

Benefit–cost analysis (BCA) provides important science to inform regulatory decision-making. Ideally, the BCA should be based on science, including economics. However, the prominent role of BCA in the policy-making process also creates an incentive to adopt practices that produce results that support a preferred policy. Indeed, rather than informing decision-making, BCA can become a tool for justifying a decision that is made by manipulating results in ways contrary to good science. This article identifies two challenges that threaten the scientific integrity of a BCA because they allow normative and policy judgments to enter into the BCA. The article concludes by identifying actions to help protect the scientific integrity of BCA.

Japan’s monetary policy: a literature review and empirical assessment

This study reviews and assesses the monetary policy implemented by the Bank of Japan (BOJ), focusing on policies that employ short-term interest rates as the operational target. Our review of empirical studies on monetary policy that influenced the BOJ’s policy reveals that they focused on (1) banking system and interest rate mechanisms, (2) financial deregulation and monetary aggregates, (3) the systematic reaction regarding the achievement of the ultimate goal, and (4) confirming how certain evidence serves as material for policy judgments and communication with the public. Our empirical results on the causal effect of monetary policy in the framework of a structural vector autoregressive model attest to the significant impact of Japan’s monetary policy on the financial market and macroeconomy from the 1980s onward. Our counterfactual simulations affirm that the central bank should consistently shift its policy stance to achieve macroeconomic stability. Even small policy rate cuts in a low-interest-rate environment make significant contributions to economic recovery.

Foreseeability, Causation, and Guilt

The question of how to define accomplices is both important and vexing, spawning a series of competing, muddled doctrines in U.S. and international law. I argue that the confusion we see in the application of complicity law stems from a deeper theoretical confusion about the nature of accomplice liability. Causal theories of complicity define it by reference to causal contribution: helping bring about the crime makes one an accomplice. But, these theories apply complicity far too broadly -- the taxi driver who unknowingly takes the victim to the site or the worker who maintains the streets all causally contribute to the crime. Recognizing this, John Gardner in particular uses rational attention as a limiting principle, putting some boundaries on the causal chains that the law should take into account. Judges, commentators, and other legal actors, encountering the same problem, have operationalized Gardner's idea in the foreseeability doctrine that similarly limits complicity to consequences that were foreseeable. All else being equal, murder is not a naturally foreseeable consequence of road maintenance. Experience with this doctrine, however, shows that it is not adequate to the task of limiting causal theories of complicity. Even with it in place courts still have to resort to ad hoc policy judgments to avoid unreasonable, overly harsh, punishments. This renders the law arbitrary and inconsistent as like cases end up with different results depending on these ad hoc judgments. Rational attention and foreseeability are therefore not sufficient. Instead, joint intention-based approaches to complicity show more promise and put foreseeability and similar epistemic concepts in their proper place.

Executive Discretion in Administering the Government's Rights and the Delegation Problem

Governments regulate private conduct. They also exercise rights of ownership and contract that are like those of private people. From the founding to today, executive officials have exercised substantial policy discretion in managing the government's own resources. That practice is consistent with the text and structure of the Constitution. Administering the government's resources, and making policy judgments in doing so, is at the core of carrying the law into execution. The executive itself does not have power to create programs that employ federal resources such as federal funds, but when Congress creates such a program, it may leave many important choices to the executive. At most, the Constitution requires that Congress provide an intelligible principle to guide that discretion. The non-delegation principle concerning regulation of private conduct may be more demanding than that, but the exercise of the government's own rights is a distinct category of executive activity. The practical scope of this principle is substantial. Federal spending today is a major tool through which Congress affects behavior. Like spending and contracting, federal regulation through licensing takes the form of the administration of the government's resources. Licensing of broadcasting, for example, rests on the principle that the airwaves are public and not private property, and that private people may use that resource only on terms the government sets. Licensing schemes put the government in the position of an owner, able to give licenses that permit conduct that otherwise would violate the owner's rights. Congress therefore may give executive officials substantial discretion when it creates a licensing system. The important question is the extent of Congress's power to put the government in the position of an owner. Two well-known early examples of delegation to the executive, the Indian Commerce Act of 1790, and the regulation of steamboat safety, took the form of licensing. The historical evidence does not indicate that proponents of those systems justified delegation on the grounds suggested here. It does suggest that steamboat licensing was understood to be based on federal control of the public right of navigation of interstate waterways. The executive function of administering the government's resources is a distinct category of executive activity from the standpoint of constitutional structure, and the principles that apply to delegation in other contexts need not apply in that context.

The Abuse of the Pardon Power Prevention Act Would Criminalize Politics

At bottom, this statute would effect a radical change in how the presidency is understood. Historically, the President has been viewed as an independent political actor, with democratic bona fides, who was charged with making discretionary policy judgments. Now, he would be transformed into a slow-moving, process-bound, “nonpartisan” actor. Some readers may praise this change. But we do not think such a change is in the public interest. Of course, the public interest is always contestable because no one has the institutional knowledge or widely accepted power to declare a monopoly on what is in the common good. The President should be able to make important decisions with vigor, independence, and dispatch. This proposed bill would alter the presidency such that he would now second-guess his official actions for fear of prosecution. Federal prosecutors should not be authorized to dictate what is in the public interest. Many people who read this bill may not realize its likely consequences. Others can foresee these consequences, and approve of them, because they seek to transform the presidency. All should recognize that the consequences of this bill, if enacted, will extend far beyond President Trump, or even a President Biden. The presidency has far less to fear from this bill than the 535 members of Congress would. Indeed, our concerns apply more forcefully to Congress, which does not control the apparatus of federal prosecution. In December 2019, we wrote: Consider a third hypothetical in which personal and public motivations are inextricably intertwined. Two members of Congress are engaged in negotiations about a bill. Each agrees to support the bill only after it is amended to provide $1 billion in additional spending in their respective districts. They each have mixed motives. First, they believe that the extra $1 billion will help improve the welfare of their districts—which is part of the public good, as they conceive it. Second, they understand that bringing home the bacon will help their reelection campaigns. “All politics is local,” the old adage goes. The run-of-the-mill horse-trading described in this example might be bad policy and, arguably, is a misuse of discretion. But whatever else it is, it is not bribery. If we’re wrong, almost every member of Congress could be indicted under the federal bribery statute. Indeed, if every such deal or compromise is a presumptive crime, then the Department of Justice will have the power to investigate every set of political compromises that accrue on nearly all major spending bills. Such a theory of bribery would allow the department to investigate, and later indict and seek to convict, members of Congress involved in political compromise and log-rolling. We should resist efforts to criminalize politics. This bill may seem like a prudent idea in the current moment. But the bill criminalizes normal politics; it will end with criminalizing political speech. Do critics of the current President really want to give Attorney General Bill Barr the power to prosecute congressional log-rolling? Be careful what you wish for.

Power and Statistical Significance in Securities Fraud Litigation

Event studies, a half-century-old approach to measuring the effect of events on stock prices, are now ubiquitous in securities fraud litigation. In determining whether the event study demonstrates a price effect, expert witnesses typically base their conclusion on whether the results are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, a threshold that is drawn from the academic literature. As a positive matter, this represents a disconnect with legal standards of proof. As a normative matter, it may reduce enforcement of fraud claims because litigation event studies typically involve quite low statistical power even for large-scale frauds. This paper, written for legal academics, judges, and policy makers, makes three contributions. First, it contributes to a nascent literature demonstrating that the standard event-study methodology can be problematic in securities litigation. In particular, the paper documents the tradeoff between power and confidence level and the ensuing impact on the likelihood that valid claims of fraud will erroneously be rejected. In so doing, the article highlights that the choice of confidence level is a policy judgment about the appropriate balance between the costs of litigation and the costs of securities fraud. Second, the article argues that the SEC has both the legal power and the institutional competence to develop litigation standards that balance these costs. Third, the article provides a novel and feasible framework through which the SEC can implement such litigation standards. The framework relies on an assessment of the defendant firm’s market capitalization and abnormal returns distribution to determine the maximum confidence level (minimum significance level) that is consistent with the minimum required power of detecting a fraud of the benchmark magnitude. The SEC is uniquely positioned to make this determination based on the information it possesses about the level of fraud in the capital markets and the role of private litigation in deterring fraud.