These are momentous times for the comparative analysis of judicial behaviour. Once the
sole province of United States (US) political scientists, the field has transformed into a global …

Comparative judicial behaviour seeks to illuminate the choices judges make and the
consequences of their choices for society. This chapter begins with a brief discussion of …

Neither legal academics nor social scientists analyse judging solely through the 'law versus
politics' dichotomy. They have instead expanded their theoretical toolkit to include four other …

From a global, comparative perspective, a court with the discretionary power to decide what
it will decide, and this fact being publicly acknowledged and uncontroversial, are both far …

The first transnational comparative study of legal party capability theory Justice is supposed
to be blind. Cynics will say they know better. But what do the facts say? This groundbreaking …

As private actors turn to international courts (ICs), we argue that judges can seize individual
rights litigation to promote themselves as protectors of the weak. By leveling the odds for …

Just as the American public is politically polarized, so too is the US Supreme Court. More
than ever before, a clear alignment exists between the Justices' partisanship and their …

A partir da literatura brasileira e estrangeira sobre a agenda e o tempo decisório de cortes,
bem como da descrição dos poderes individuais de pauta dos plenários presencial e virtual …

Why do we need databases in research on comparative judicial behaviour? This chapter
argues that comprehensive assessments of common models on judicial behaviour require …

Private actors are increasingly turning to international courts (ICs). We argue that ICs can
refract private litigation to build legitimacy and mitigate intergovernmental backlash. By …