IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v7y2018i2p14-d141333.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Judicial Empowerment

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas M. Keck

    (Department of Political Science, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-1020, USA)

Abstract

Drawing on an ongoing international data collection effort, this paper examines the free expression jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada and the European Court of Human Rights in an effort to assess the political beneficiaries of judicial empowerment. Free expression is a universally recognized fundamental right, and it is a right that is regularly invoked in court by a rich diversity of political actors. As such, free speech law provides an illuminating window onto how constitutional courts respond to similar claims from differently situated claimants. This paper compares the response by two influential courts to free expression claims filed by for-profit businesses and by labor advocates.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas M. Keck, 2018. "Assessing Judicial Empowerment," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:7:y:2018:i:2:p:14-:d:141333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/7/2/14/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/7/2/14/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stone Sweet, Alec, 2004. "The Judicial Construction of Europe," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199275533.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Frith, 2008. "Cosmopolitan Democracy and the EU: The Case of Gender," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 215-236, March.
    2. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2007. "Reflections on multilevel legitimacy," MPIfG Working Paper 07/3, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    4. Robert Basedow, 2021. "The EU's International Investment Policy ten years on: the Policy‐Making Implications of Unintended Competence Transfers," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 643-660, May.
    5. Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2021. "Issue attention on international courts: Evidence from the European Court of Justice," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 793-815, October.
    6. José Luis Castro-Montero & Edwin Alblas & Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2018. "The Court of Justice and treaty revision: A case of strategic leniency?," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 570-596, December.
    7. Achim Hurrelmann, 2023. "Constitutional Abeyances: Reflecting on EU Treaty Development in Light of the Canadian Experience," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 241-250.
    8. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2012. "Legitimacy intermediation in the multilevel European polity and its collapse in the euro crisis," MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    9. Philipp Genschel & Markus Jachtenfuchs, 2017. "From market integration to core state powers: the Eurozone crisis, the refugee crisis and integration theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/26, European University Institute.
    10. Nathan Lillie & Ian Greer, 2007. "Industrial Relations, Migration, and Neoliberal Politics: The Case of the European Construction Sector," Politics & Society, , vol. 35(4), pages 551-581, December.
    11. Fritz W. Scharpf, 2009. "The Asymmetry of European Integration - or why the EU cannot be a Social Market Economy," KFG Working Papers p0006, Free University Berlin.
    12. Denise Carolin Hübner, 2016. "The ‘National Decisions’ database (Dec.Nat): Introducing a database on national courts’ interactions with European Law," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(2), pages 324-339, June.
    13. Andreas Grimmel, 2011. "Integration and the Context of Law: Why the European Court of Justice is not a Political Actor," Les Cahiers européens de Sciences Po 3, Centre d'études européennes (CEE) at Sciences Po, Paris.
    14. Nicolas Lampach & Arthur Dyevre, 2020. "Choosing for Europe: judicial incentives and legal integration in the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 65-86, August.
    15. Hristina RUNCHEVA TASEV & Milena APOSTOLOVSKA-STEPANOSKA & Leposava OGNJANOSKA, 2020. "Union based on the rule of law: the Court of Justice of the European Union and the (future of) European integration," Eastern Journal of European Studies, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 11, pages 396-426, December.
    16. Richard Higgott, 2012. "The Utility and Limits of the ‘European Model’ for the Regional Institutionalization of East Asia," Chapters, in: Jehoon Park & T. J. Pempel & Geng Xiao (ed.), Asian Responses to the Global Financial Crisis, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Marlene Wind, 2010. "The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 1039-1063, September.
    18. Jarman, Holly & Greer, Scott, 2010. "Crossborder trade in health services: Lessons from the European laboratory," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 158-163, February.
    19. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2005. "Recht und Politik in der Reform des deutschen Föderalismus," MPIfG Working Paper 05/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. Roland Vaubel, 2009. "Constitutional courts as promoters of political centralization: lessons for the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 203-222, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:7:y:2018:i:2:p:14-:d:141333. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.