From jle-skills
Evaluates whether a law-and-economics project fits JLE vs. sister journals and sharpens its central legal/regulatory question. Use when a project's venue or question scope is uncertain.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jle-skills:jle-topic-selectionThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- A project analyzes a law, a regulation, a court, or a legal institution economically, but you are unsure it is "JLE-shaped"
JLE wants economic analysis of law, regulation, and legal institutions where a real legal/regulatory question is answered with a credible empirical design or a disciplined theoretical model, in the Chicago price-theory-plus-institutions tradition. The legal rule or institution must be load-bearing — not background color for a generic economics paper, and not a doctrinal argument dressed in regression.
| Signal in your project | Likely fit |
|---|---|
| A legal rule / regulation / enforcement regime changes behavior, and you identify the effect credibly | JLE (core) |
| The contribution is primarily doctrinal or normative-legal, lightly empirical | lean Journal of Legal Studies (also UChicago, more legal/doctrinal) |
| The question is about organizations, governance, or positive political economy / institutions-as-equilibria | lean JLEO |
| Solid law-and-econ but incremental, field-internal, or a shorter contribution | American Law and Economics Review |
| The legal angle is incidental; it is really labor/public/IO with a law label | a field journal or AEJ, not JLE |
| Pure mechanism-design / contract theory with no legal institution | a theory journal, not JLE |
JLE is question-first and institution-respecting: an empirical paper needs the rule's mechanics right (who is bound, when it binds, what the counterfactual rule is); a theory paper needs comparative statics about a legal rule that someone could in principle test or recognize in the world.
jle-identification or jle-theory-model.A researcher has scraped two decades of state appellate decisions and wants to "study judges and the economy." That is a dataset, not a question. Working through the fit test: the cleanest variation is the staggered random assignment of cases to judges with measurably different priors — a court-assignment design. The question becomes "what is the effect of being assigned a pro-defendant judge on firm investment after a contract dispute, identified by random case assignment?" The doctrinal debate is whether judicial discretion creates legal uncertainty that chills investment; the institution is real (assignment rules, recusal, appeal). Now it is JLE-shaped — and clearly not a doctrinal JLS note or a JLEO governance study.
A project lands more naturally if it sits in one of JLE's historical strengths. Use this to confirm the question is recognizably law-and-economics:
If the question does not sit in or adjacent to one of these, re-examine whether the legal institution is really load-bearing.
【Question】one sentence, legal rule + economic outcome + agents named
【Venue verdict】JLE because [not JLS: ___] [not JLEO: ___] [not ALER: ___]
【Institutional mechanics】who is bound / when it binds / counterfactual rule: ___
【Debate it informs】regulatory or doctrinal question: ___
【Design or model seed】law change / threshold / assignment / enforcement event / testable model
【Next step】jle-literature-positioning
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jle-skillsHelps decide if an empirical law-and-economics manuscript fits the Journal of Law and Economics, with framing, method bar, and desk-reject heuristics.
Evaluates whether a law-economics-organization manuscript topic fits JLEO vs sibling journals, sharpening the institutional/organizational claim.
Routes manuscript work for The Journal of Law and Economics (JLE) submissions, directing to the appropriate jle-* sub-skill based on current stage or bottleneck.