European University Institute Library

Can courts be bulwarks of democracy?, judges and the politics of prudence, Jeffrey K. Staton, Christopher Reenock, Jordan Holsinger

eng

index present

non fiction

Can courts be bulwarks of democracy?

electronic resource

dictionaries

1262692047

Jeffrey K. Staton, Christopher Reenock, Jordan Holsinger

Comparative constitutional law and policyCambridge Social Sciences eBooks

judges and the politics of prudence

Liberal concepts of democracy envision courts as key institutions for the promotion and protection of democratic regimes. Yet social science scholarship suggests that courts are fundamentally constrained in ways that undermine their ability to do so. Recognizing these constraints, this book argues that courts can influence regime instability by affecting inter-elite conflict. They do so in three ways: by helping leaders credibly reveal their rationales for policy choices that may appear to violate legal rules; by encouraging leaders to less frequently make decisions that raise concerns about rule violations; and by encouraging the opposition to accept potential rule violations. Courts promote the prudent use of power in each of these approaches. This book evaluates the implications of this argument using a century of global data tracking judicial politics and democratic survival.--, Provided by publisher

Introduction -- Democratic regimes and their survival -- Political competition and judicial independence -- Judicial effects on democratic regime stability -- Imprudent politics -- Will courts be bulwarks of democracy in the United States? -- Conclusion