Authors-meet-critics: Dissensus over Liberal Democracy: Insights from European Judges

Abstract

Liberal democracy is facing increasing strain across Europe, from overt attacks on judicial independence to more subtle processes of institutional erosion. The volume Dissensus over Liberal Democracy: Insights from European Judges intervenes in this debate by placing judges’ voices—often treated as abstract institutional actors rather than reflexive subjects—at the centre. Building on scholarship on democratic backsliding, abusive constitutionalism, and illiberal institutional change, the volume offers a rare, pan-European portrait of how judges experience and interpret the contemporary contestation of liberal democracy. The book brings together 18 in-depth interviews with judges from across Europe, including former members of the CJEU and ECtHR, constitutional and supreme court judges, lower court judges, prosecutors, and judges who have been dismissed, sanctioned, or forced into exile. Covering a wide range of contexts—Hungary and Poland, but also Romania, Serbia, Turkey, as well as long-established democracies such as Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and the UK—the volume captures how pressures on judicial independence unfold across different legal and political systems. First, the book provides unprecedented empirical evidence on how judges themselves perceive processes of dissensus and democratic deterioration. Their narratives shed light on how political interference, disciplinary tools, and societal distrust reshape their professional environment and their understanding of what it means to act as an independent judge when liberal-democratic institutions are questioned or dismantled. Second, the volume offers academic research a distinctive point of access to judges’ reasoning and normative horizons. Adopting a narrative approach, it reveals how judges frame trade-offs, confront ethical dilemmas, and reflect on their responsibilities when democracy is in peril. In doing so, it contributes to refining theoretical debates at the intersection of political science, comparative constitutional law, and the sociology of the judiciary. Third, the book serves as an accessible resource for practitioners, judicial associations, and an engaged public. It opens a window into the minds of a crucial counter-power in our democracies, showing how judges navigate tensions between law and politics, decide whether and how to speak out, and mobilise domestic and transnational networks to defend the rule of law. This panel will bring together the editors and external discussants to debate the empirical, methodological, and normative implications of taking judicial narratives seriously for understanding the future of democracy in Europe.

Title	Details
Illiberalism on Trial: Ideational Boundaries, Institutional Practices, and Public Diffusion	View Paper Details
The Fertile Fear of the Abyss: Or, How the Rule of Law Crisis Spurred Judges to Mobilize European Law	View Paper Details
Judicial Embedding Strategies	View Paper Details
Institutional resistance and professional ethos in the Italian asylum courts.	View Paper Details
Judicial Mobilisation 2.0 - Judicial Independence While Rebuilding Rule of Law	View Paper Details