Deferring to the Bureaucracy? Analyzing Generalist Judges’ Exercise of Judicial Review in the Welfare Sector

Judicial review of bureaucratic decisions is an increasingly important mechanism for controlling bureaucratic discretion and protecting individual rights. This paper explores i) how the institutional design of judicial review procedures can be expected to shape the judges’ exercise of their review powers, and ii) how generalist judges with extensive formal review powers scrutinize bureaucratic decisions: do they show deference to the bureaucratic decision makers as expected by previous research? Empirically, the paper investigates how Swedish generalist judges conduct review proceedings, for example, the measures they rely on in assessing the case and whether they issue specific remedies in their rulings.