The past decade has witnessed a worldwide explosion of work aimed at illuminating judicial-
behavior: the choices judges make and the consequences of their choices. We focus on …

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 …

When courts seek to strengthen their own institutional power, they often need to be strategic.
In many fraught political contexts, judiciaries lack a history of asserting authority against …

How do people respond to different decision-making processes in high courts? One long-
standing view suggests that citizens expect courts to be neutral arbiters of legal …

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

Judges are human beings. Is their behavior therefore subject to the same effects that
psychology and behavioral economics have documented for convenience samples, like …

This chapter provides an overview of the current state of the literature on public opinion and
legitimacy of the courts. It begins by outlining the competing theoretical perspectives and …

Resumo O Supremo Tribunal Federal é uma instituição “individualista”? Em três décadas de
estudos acadêmicos e debates públicos, o tema de um tribunal tão dividido quanto o …

With high profile cases being decided by 5-4 votes divided along ideological lines, there is a
worry that frequent ideological disagreement over the Constitution will erode the legitimacy …

Mens statens retningslinjer slår fast at høyesterettsdommere skal ha gode faglige
kvalifikasjoner, sier representasjonsteorien at dommerne bør speile befolkningen for å gi …