Mapping and explaining judicial decision-making

Abstract

Judicial decision making is central to the study of law and courts. Yet, how we conceptualize and measure judicial decisions and how we can best explain variation in judicial decision making remain open questions. This panel brings together papers that develop innovative theoretical and methodological approaches to understanding judicial decision making and the content of judicial decisions. This panel moves beyond traditional debates of activism vs restraint to consider understudied dimensions of judicial decisions, ranging from judicial innovation, mobilization of public support, and the treatment of soft law and international law. The papers featured on this panel explore these dimensions of judicial decision-making by employing original methodological approaches, from machine learning to computer-assisted content analysis. Finally, the panel covers a variety of explanatory perspectives to account for judicial decisions in a diverse context, including the role of gender, authoritarian politics, and institutional legitimation

Title	Details
Give them the word, they sharpen the sword: How high courts use language to exert political and societal power	View Paper Details
Authoritarian capture or strategic resistance? When judges use international human rights law	View Paper Details
Do constitutional courts restrict government policy? The effects of budgetary implications and bloc-politics in the Hungarian Constitutional Court's decisions between 1990 and 2018	View Paper Details
Non-binding but useful? Exploring national judges’ motivations to use EU soft law	View Paper Details