The judicial politics of federal relations
A scoping review
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 17830302 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Francisco J Jiménez-Pérez (Universidad Pablo de Olavide, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2026 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Fascículo | 1 |
| Data de publicação | 2026-04-30 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Political Research Exchange (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 2474-736X • E-ISSN: 2474-736X |
| Editora | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/2474736x.2026.2661055 |
| OpenAlex | W7159856160 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referências citadas | 49 |
Extensive research has examined the interaction between judicial behaviour and federal dynamics. However, performing systematic comparative research in this field remains challenging. To address this, the article conducts a PRISMA scoping review to map the academic landscape of judicial politics in federal high courts. The study aims to evaluate the empirical literature on the field, identify dominant research trends, methodological biases, and theoretical gaps, and examine how federal high court adjudication shapes intergovernmental relations, thereby providing a methodological pathway and theoretical innovations to advance cross-national research. Following a three-stage protocol, we systematically searched the Web of Science. First, we defined eligibility using the PCC framework, focusing on national federal high courts and judicial politics (1900-2024). Second, a pool of 15,117 records was refined using Excel VBA for automated deduplication and keyword filtering, yielding 12,038 records. Third, a manual appraisal of titles and abstracts by two reviewers yielded a final dataset of 106 studies. These were categorized into five analytical dimensions: bibliometric and identification metadata; authorship and institutional profile; publication and editorial context; geographic and comparative scope; and theoretical and substantive content. The results reveal a significant U.S.-centric bias in academic journals, scholars' institutions, theoretical models, and case studies
Adjudication · Empirical research · Judicial opinion · National archives · Politics · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Policy Transfer and Learning · Political Systems and Governance
The Rules of Federalism
The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited
The PRISMA 2020 statement
Loyalty to the party or loyalty to the party leader
Judicial Guardians
Does polarization increase participation? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Constitutional courts and citizens’ perceptions of judicial systems in Europe
The Italian Constitutional Court and recentralization along the pendulum of regionalism
Rethinking Regime Politics
National Policy Preferences and Judicial Review of State Statutes at the United States Supreme Court
Puppy Federalism and the Blessings of America
The New Constitutional Politics of Europe
Strategic Selection of Legal Instruments on the U.S. Supreme Court
Choices in Context
Towards an Integrated Model of the U.S. Supreme Court's Federalism Decision Making
Strategic Delay and the Use of Incompatibility Rulings at the German Constitutional Court
Judicial Majoritarianism
Presidential Constraints on Supreme Court Decision-Making
How Courts Decide Federalism Disputes
Unifying the field of comparative judicial politics
Choosing between the government and the regions
Pushing Boundaries
How Supreme Court Justices Supervise Ideologically Distant States
Evaluating Theories of Decision-making on the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal
Supreme Court rulings at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic
Processo decisório no Supremo Tribunal Federal
O papel do Supremo Tribunal Federal na intermediação dos conflitos federativos no contexto da Covid-19
Building a Scientific Comparative Judicial Politics and Arousing the Dragons of Antiscientism
Party, Policy, or Duty
Supremo relator
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | Não |