IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v50y2006i1p98-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Constitutional Review and the Selective Promotion of Case Results

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey K. Staton

Abstract

A significant majority of the world's constitutional courts publicize their decisions through direct contact with the national media. This interest in public information is puzzling in so far as constitutional judges are not directly accountable to voters. I argue that the promotion of case results is consistent with a theory of judicial behavior in which public support for courts can undermine incentives for insincere decision making. In this article, I develop a simple game theory model that identifies how case promotion is linked to judicial choice. Results of a simultaneous equations model estimating the Mexican Supreme Court's merits decisions and its choices to publicize those decisions by issuing press releases to national media outlets support an account of constitutional review in which judges believe they can influence their authority through case promotion.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey K. Staton, 2006. "Constitutional Review and the Selective Promotion of Case Results," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(1), pages 98-112, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:50:y:2006:i:1:p:98-112
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00172.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00172.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00172.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emily Hencken Ritter & Courtenay R. Conrad, 2016. "Human rights treaties and mobilized dissent against the state," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 449-475, December.
    2. Daniel Finke, 2020. "At loggerheads over state aid: Why the Commission rejects aid and governments comply," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 474-496, September.
    3. Tom S. Clark, 2009. "The Separation of Powers, Court Curbing, and Judicial Legitimacy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 971-989, October.
    4. Yukihiro Yazaki, 2014. "Rights and judicial independence," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 179-201, May.
    5. Jeffrey K. Staton & Georg Vanberg, 2008. "The Value of Vagueness: Delegation, Defiance, and Judicial Opinions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 504-519, July.
    6. Michael Gilligan & Leslie Johns & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2010. "Strengthening International Courts and the Early Settlement of Disputes," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(1), pages 5-38, February.
    7. Courtenay R Conrad & Daniel W Hill Jr & Will H Moore, 2018. "Torture and the limits of democratic institutions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(1), pages 3-17, January.
    8. Jorge Ernesto Roa Roa, 2019. "Control de constitucionalidad deliberativo" El ciudadano ante la justicia constitucional, la acción pública de inconstitucionalidad y la legitimidad democrática del control judicial al legislador," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1119.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:amposc:v:50:y:2006:i:1:p:98-112. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.