Pushing Boundaries
How Lawmakers Shape Judicial Decision-Making
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 6246779 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Philipp Schroeder (0000-0003-3410-1152, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2022 |
| Volume | 55 |
| Fascículo | 14 |
| Páginas | 2447-2479 |
| Data de publicação | 2022-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Comparative Political Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0010-4140 • E-ISSN: 1552-3829 |
| Editora | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/00104140221089649 |
| OpenAlex | W4281572111 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 6 |
| Referências citadas | 40 |
Existing literature highlights that constitutional courts influence lawmakers’ policy choices without actively intervening in the policymaking process. Lawmakers know that courts may scrutinize their acts and have incentives to amend their policies to pre-empt judicial interventions. However, evidence suggests that lawmakers are not always prepared to sacrifice policy objectives to avoid censure from courts. I develop a formal model showing how lawmakers who provoke confrontations with courts shape judicial decision-making. Drawing on an original dataset of German federal laws adopted between 1977 and 2015 that were reviewed by the German Federal Constitutional Court, I then show that the Court moderated its strike rate of laws when lawmakers had dismissed credible advice that their acts were unconstitutional. The theoretical argument and empirical evidence indicate that courts are more likely to show deference to lawmakers who push constitutional boundaries in their policy choices
Argument (complex analysis · Constitutional law · Deference · Economics · German · Incentive · Judicial activism · Judicial opinion · Judicial review · Law and economics · Political science · Sociology · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Legal and Constitutional Studies
The judicial politics of federal relations
Why the European Parliament litigates
Liberal-democratic self-defense through rights restrictions
Constitutional Law-Making in the U.S. Supreme Court
Do Preliminary References Increase Public Support for European Law? Experimental Evidence from Germany
Pushing Boundaries
Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models
The Politics of Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court
The Politics of Constitutional Review in Germany
Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy
Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria
Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences
With Luxembourg in mind ... the remaking of national policies in the face of ECJ jurisprudence
The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Decisions
Compliance
Abstract Judicial Review, Legislative Bargaining, and Policy Compromise
Legislative-Judicial Relations
Congress, the Supreme Court, and Judicial Review
Judicial Review Timing and Legislative Posturing
The judiciary as legislator? How the European Court of Justice shapes policy-making in the European Union
Judicial Behavior under Political Constraints
The Semiconstrained Court
In the shadow of the constitutional council
Judicial Independence and the Reality of Political Power
Judicial Majoritarianism
A Model of the Endogenous Development of Judicial Institutions in Federal and International Systems
Ducking Trouble
Executive Discretion, Judicial Decision Making, and Separation of Powers in the United States
Modeling Supreme Court Strategic Decision Making
Judicial Independence and Political Uncertainty
Constitutional courts as veto players
Pushing Boundaries
The Federal Constitutional Court in the German Political System
The Value of Vagueness
The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy
The Politics of Judicial Procedures
The Role of Constitutional Courts in the Establishment and Maintenance of Democratic Systems of Government
On the Legitimacy of National High Courts
| Obras citantes distintas | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1,5 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 6 |