Abstract
This article proposes a new cross-national thesis for judicial decision making. The judicial politicization theory posits that judges on highly politicized high courts will be more likely to decide cases using ideological and attitudinal factors than judges at less politicized courts. The theory holds that informal norms regarding judicial appointment by the executive are more important than the formal selection mechanism in determining whether a judiciary is highly or less politicized. The results show significant attitudinal judicial voting at each high court and strong support for the contention that judges on highly politicized courts are more likely to decide cases ideologically.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 335-347 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Political Research Quarterly |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 2011 |
Keywords
- Australia
- Canada
- Comparative judicial politics
- High courts
- Law and courts
- United States
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Judicial politicization, ideology, and activism at the high courts of the united states, canada, and australia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver