The mutual dependence between courts and their compliance constituencies is a
fundamental feature of judicial power. Actors whose rights and interests are reinforced by …

Scandinavian supreme courts have been described as deferential to the elected branches of
government and reluctant to exercise their limited review powers. However, in recent years …

" Constitutional courts in many countries seek to constrain elected actors often by striking
down or vetoing their laws. A large proportion of these courts select their judges through a …

Comparing and contextualizing what judges say about the law is the job of comparative
legal analysis. Studying internal and external forces that explain the judges' choices and …

Scholars often argue that whereas unanimous rulings should boost public support for court
decisions, dissents should fuel public opposition. Previous studies on public responses to …

European courts have responded to increasing caseloads by providing justices or other
actors with a higher degree of discretionary docket control. Does docket type—mandatory or …

Comparative studies tend to attribute observed differences in judicial dissent to different
legal tradition. Divergent dissent behavior of constitutional courts in Slovenia and Croatia …

This book is about law clerks and the institutionalization of the Norwegian Supreme Court.
We analyse how the Court took advantage of the slow and steady growth of clerks to …

Global developments over the last two decades have debunked the traditional
understanding that separate opinions are idiosyncratic of courts in nations following the …

Disagreement among judges has always existed, even though not all courts have been
allowed to reveal it. Disagreements between the members of a judicial panel regarding the …