Judicial Politics in an Age of Democratic Contestation

As courts are increasingly weaponised by political actors and judicial decisions shape democratic outcomes, analysing judicial politics has never been more crucial. The growing judicialisation of politics calls for scholars to identify the factors influencing judicial decision-making and to assess how these decisions affect political and democratic processes. This section brings together panels that explore these dynamics by examining institutional design, strategic litigation, off-bench behaviour, and the use of AI, as well as the broader impact of courts’ rulings on policymaking and political action. Proposed panels: 1. Towards trustworthy AI in adjudication Chair: Monika Glavina and Caroline L. Silva This panel explores the challenges of (dis)trust courts face when integrating so-called artificial intelligence (AI) tools in judicial decision making. Trust – a driver of acceptance and legitimacy of courts – includes not only citizens’ trust, but also the perspective of judges, lawyers and other professionals. The panel explores the legal, social and technical issues faced by the judiciary. It welcomes empirical contributions that investigate the role of trust, as well as methodological contributions on how to conceptualize and measure trust in AI in justice. 2. Judicial authority and political intent: Quantitative approaches to judicial decision-making Chair: Silje Synnøve Lyder Hermansen & Benjamin G. Engst Courts are political actors, yet systematic evidence on how they exercise authority remains fragmented. We invite quantitative and comparative work testing theories of judicial behavior, institutional design, and political interaction. How to measure judicial preferences, incentives, and constraints? What empirical implications follow from competing accounts of judicial independence, strategic adaptation, and accountability? We welcome contributions that bridge data and theory – new measures, causal designs, or comparative data – to illuminate how political intent and legal rules shape judicial decisions. 3. Specialised courts in multilevel governance: Authority, dialogue, and institutional dynamics Chair: Daanish Naithani & Andreas Corcaci This panel examines judicial dialogue between specialised courts (e.g. the Unified Patent Court, administrative tribunals, labour or anti-corruption courts) and general or supranational courts such as the Court of Justice of the EU. It explores how specialised courts build legitimacy through technical expertise and trust within multilevel governance. Topics include preliminary references, coordination, legitimacy, communication, embedding, and compliance. Theoretical, empirical, and comparative papers are welcome. 4. Judicial independence and policymaking Chair: Valentin Feneberg & Natascha Zaun (natascha.zaun@leuphana.de) Understanding the role of courts requires a careful analysis of both their de jure and de facto independence. From whom are courts and judges independent, to what extent, and how does it show? This panel invites papers that examine both the impact of judicial independence on policymaking, as well as how political dynamics shape, constrain, or even threaten judicial autonomy. Furthermore, the panel seeks to engage with different conceptualizations of judicial independence across political systems and levels of the judiciary. 5. Off-bench judicial politics: External determinants of judicial behaviour and outcomes Chair: Ula Aleksandra Kos & Umut Yüksel (UCL, u.yuksel@ucl.ac.uk) The panel focuses on external judicial politics, arguing that off-bench determinants outside (inter)national judges crucially shape judicial behaviour and outcomes. We challenge judicial politics research’s narrow focus on internal factors (eg judges’ ideologies or biases) and examine external influences through three key thematic areas: (1) groups with(out) access to justice, (2) the (in)formal networks surrounding courts, and (3) public trust and support for judicial institutions. The papers employ diverse methodologies (e.g. surveys, experiments) and draw on comparative evidence from both international and domestic courts. 6. Courts and their allies Chair: Cordula Tibi Weber Allies as opposition parties, civil society, the media, foreign governments, or international courts play crucial roles in strengthening judicial independence and visibility. This panel invites papers that explore the multifaceted relationships between courts and their allies, examining how these support judicial institutions in defending against political attacks, promoting their work, educating the public about their rights and enhancing legitimacy. By analyzing diverse forms of collaboration, the panel shows how such alliances contribute to courts’ resilience and broader institutional goals. 7. The aftermath of non-compliance: Responses and political dynamics Chair: Olof Larsson & Karn Leijon Recent research on state non-compliance with international obligations has moved beyond examining the causes of violations to investigating the actors that monitor and enforce compliance. This panel shifts attention further along the compliance chain, exploring how instances and accusations of non-compliance, as well as court rulings that establish non-compliant behavior, are received and politically mobilized by states, public authorities, and other actors. We invite contributions that analyze the domestic and international repercussions of non-compliance, including legitimation struggles, reputational effects, and strategic responses by states, institutions, and civil society. 8. The politics of strategic litigation: Democratic safeguard or threat? Chair: Benjamin Moron-Puech & Marion Pollaer This panel invites researchers to explore the practice of strategic litigation. Civil society actors are increasingly initiating legal action to pursue broader societal change beyond the case at hand. Yet there is disagreement about whether and when this practice damages democracy (as in the case of SLAPP, strategic lawsuits against public participation) or supports democracy by compensating some of its defects. This panel invites contributions drawing on law, political science and philosophy. Both empirical and theoretical works are welcome. 9. The politics of judicial reform Chair: Johan Karlsson Schaffer & Thalia Gerzso While there is broad consensus that enabling judicial independence is vital to democracy and the rule of law, judicial politics research also suggests that independent courts remain strategically attuned to their political environment. This panel invites contributions that investigate how interests, ideas and institutions shape judicial reform processes, and explore how policymakers, judges, lawyers and other interested elites interact in reforming e.g. constitutional review powers and bills of rights, docket control, judicial appointment systems, or judicial governance. 10. Juridification and accountability in the welfare sector Chair: Karin Leijon, Uppsala University and Linköping University Juridification—the growing power of courts and legal rules in welfare governance—reshapes professional discretion and service quality. This panel explores how courts exercise their authority, whether they defer to professional expertise, and how juridification mechanisms such as judicial review, individual rights, and detailed regulations enhance or constrain accountability across welfare sectors from the perspectives of courts, professionals, bureaucrats, and citizens.