Reputation and judicial tactics : a theory of national and international courts /
Saved in:
Author / Creator: | Dothan, Shai, author. |
---|---|
Imprint: | New York : Cambridge University Press, 2014. |
Description: | 1 online resource |
Language: | English |
Series: | Comparative constitutional law and policy Comparative constitutional law and policy. |
Subject: | |
Format: | E-Resource Book |
URL for this record: | http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/12588130 |
Table of Contents:
- Cover; Half-title; Series information; Title page; Copyright information; Dedication; Table of contents; Acknowledgments; 1 Introduction; A. Courts as long-term strategic actors that seek to maximize their reputations; 2 A theory of the reputation of courts; A. What is courts'' reputation?; B. Why courts want to increase their reputation; C. The reputation of parties facing the court; D. How courts improve their reputations; 1. Demanding judgments; 2. Discretionary reasoning; 3. Dissent; E. Reputation and public support; F. Methods for measuring judicial reputation.
- G. What this theory can and cannot explainH. Conclusion; 3 Constraints on courts; A. Legal-internal constraints; B. External constraints on national courts; 1. Noncompliance; 2. Criticism; 3. Curbing the court''s jurisdiction; 4. Changing the law; 5. Establishing new courts; 6. Influencing judicial selection and sanctions against judges; 7. Manipulating the court''s budget; C. External constraints on international courts; 1. Noncompliance; 2. Criticism; 3. Exiting the court''s jurisdiction; 4. Changing the treaty; 5. Establishing new courts.
- 6. Influencing judicial selection and sanctions against judges7. Manipulating the court''s budget; D. Comparing the constraints on national and international courts; E. The influence of third parties on judicial constraints; F. Conclusion and the tradeoff between external and internal constraints; 4 Tactics to increase courts'' reputation; A. Walking on the brink of noncompliance; B. Matching the remedy to the court''s reputation; C. Matching the reasoning to the court''s reputation; D. Matching the remedy to the reasoning; E. Incrementalism; F. Distinguishing remedy and precedent.
- G. Matching the demands to the partyH. Pleasing both parties; I. Spending reputation; J. Conclusion; 5 National court case study: Israeli Supreme Court; A. Background; B. The court''s strategy; 1. Shifting to discretionary reasoning as the court''s reputation increases; 2. Matching demanding judgments with constrained reasoning; 3. Incrementally progressing doctrine; 4. Matching demanding precedents with nondemanding remedies; C. The executive''s response; D. The court''s adaptation; E. Conclusion; 6 International court case study: European Court of Human Rights; A. Background.
- B. The court''s strategy1. Increasing the demands from the states; 2. Progressing incrementally; C. Facing the states'' strategy; 1. Demanding more from low-reputation states; D. Conclusion and the falsifiability of conflicting tendencies; 7 When compliance is irrelevant; A. Almost certain compliance; B. Almost certain noncompliance; C. No tangible compliance required; D. Other unique situations; E. Conclusion; 8 Conclusions; A. Summary; B. Normative implications; Bibliography; Books; Articles; Judgments; Israeli Supreme Court; European Court of Human Rights; U.S. Supreme Court.