Law and Courts

Domestic and international courts have acquired increasing influence over issues ranging from migration and the environment to state membership in international organisations and the powers of democratically elected legislatures. At the same time, backlashes against courts has spread across democratic and non-democratic regimes, challenging the very essence of the role of the judiciary. These developments demonstrate how important and timely research on courts has become and raise crucial questions. This section hosts research on the policy-making role of courts, judicial behavior, the judicialization of politics and politicization of the judiciary. The Section explores these topics through the following Panels: Panel 1. Informal Institutions and Judicial Independence Chairs: Maria Popova (McGill University), Katarína Šipulová (Masaryk University) Previous scholarship argues that strengthening formal institutions will foster the rule of law and reduce the informal sector in domestic politics. Recent events from Central and Eastern Europe undermine these claims, suggesting that informal institutions, such as patronage and corruption, may threaten judicial independence. This Panel addresses the relationship between informal institutions and judiciaries. It welcomes Papers based on case studies from within and outside Europe that consider a variety of informal institutions and their impact on judicial independence. Panel 2. Judicial Politics: New Data and Methods Chairs: Benjamin Engst (University of Mannheim), Philipp Schroeder (Umeå University) Comparative research on judicial behaviour, courts’ inner-workings and interactions with other political actors has been suffering from a lack of systematic large-scale data comparable to that of the US Supreme Court. This panel invites scholars to address methodological challenges in the field and present novel tools that allow for generating insights into the decision-making of domestic and international courts. In particular, we welcome research that (1) draws on efforts to establish systematic databases on courts beyond the USA or (2) explores judicial behaviour through novel methodologies. Panel 3. Text Analysis in Judicial Politics Chairs: Lisa Lechner (Innsbruck), Philipp Meyer (Hannover) The vast number of legal documents that are publicly available and the development of text analysis methods presents new opportunities for studying judicial politics. Quantitative assessments of court filings, laws, and judicial decisions allow for new insights into how legal actors strategize and make decisions. This panel aims to understand opportunities and challenges in using (quantitative) text analysis to advance our knowledge of judicial processes. We invite papers that look at the following questions: How do legal authorities write legal text? To what degree do legal institutions refer to each other? What consequences does the word-usage in legal documents have? How do court decisions influence legislation and the drafting of laws? Panel 4. Communicating the Judiciary Chairs: José M. Reis (Hamburg), Philipp Meyer (Hannover) Jeremy Bentham said, “publicity is the very soul of justice.” For judiciaries, publicity is often about access to judicial rulings and legal argumentation. Nowadays, we observe a spread of access to information to government institutions in general, and to courts in particular. Furthermore, courts are becoming increasingly aware of the opportunities for using strategic communication to strengthen their effectiveness. This panel addresses the causes and effects of publicity in the judiciary on the general public, on courts’ relationship with other branches of government, and on judicial behavior. We invite Papers that look at questions about judicial transparency, judicial public communication strategies, and media coverage of courts. Panel 5. Legal Mobilization: Patterns and Consequences Chair: Johan K. Shaffer (University of Gothenburg) The transformation of law, policy and courts as a result of legal mobilization has been identified all over the world. The impact of litigation transcends individual rights protection and allows the courts to shape policy in areas as disparate as taxation, welfare, education and asylum. What are the evolving patterns of strategic litigation? How and when do actors mobilize the law? Under what conditions does legal mobilization have an impact on law, policy, and courts? This panel provides an opportunity for scholars to examine evolving patterns and consequences of legal mobilization. Panel 6. Diversity on the Bench Chair: David Kosař (Masaryk University) The role of diversity in the composition of judiciaries and its influence on judicial decision-making draws increasing academic interest. This panel seeks to address differences in decision-making by individual judges with different backgrounds (such as gender, nationality, ethnicity) and by judicial panels with different composition. We invite papers that study the effects of diversity, or address the challenges and factors that promote or hinder diversity in the judiciary: What are the patterns of composition in various judiciaries? Are there systemic differences between the decisions of judges with different backgrounds? Does the effect of diversity vary between different areas of law? What factors enable or hinder women or minorities in the judiciary? Panel 7. Courts of refuge? The role of the judiciary in migration governance Chair: Veronica Federico (University of Florence) In recent years, an unprecedented wave of asylum seekers has generated vivid public debates, policies, legislation, and jurisprudence. Much has been written on migration in Europe and elsewhere, but the role of courts, despite their unprecedented role in migration governance, remains underexplored. What are the similarities and differences in the judicial discourse vis-a-vis the migration? How are courts translating the individual, state or origin and socio-anthropological narratives into rulings? What role do courts play in the (inter)national management of migration flows? The aim of this panel is to collect papers that address these questions from a variety of perspectives and methods. Panel 8. Politicization and backlash against courts. Chair: Daniel Naurin (University of Oslo) Politicization and political backlash against constitutional and international courts has occurred across the globe in recent years, suggesting that it is a broad phenomenon. This panel explores this trend by considering questions such as: How should politicization or backlash be conceptualized? How do we explain attacks against courts? How do courts anticipate and react to challenges from its political environment? What can be learned from previous historical periods of political challenges against courts?