The Influence of Public Opinion and Media on Judicial Decision-Making: Elite Judges’ Perceptions and Strategies
By: Monika Hanych, Hubert Smekal and Jaroslav Benák
References
- Baum MA and Groeling T, ‘New Media and the Polarization of American Political Discourse’ (2008) 25 Political Communication 345. DOI: 10.1080/10584600802426965
- Casillas CJ, Enns PK and Wohlfarth PC, ‘How Public Opinion Constrains the U.S. Supreme Court’ (2011) 55 American Journal of Political Science 74. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00485.x
- Clark TS, The Limits of Judicial Independence (1 edition, Cambridge University Press 2010). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511761867
- Clawson RA and Waltenburg EN, ‘Support For A Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision Support For A Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision: A Story in Black and White, A Story in Black and White’ (2003) 31 American Politics Research 251. DOI: 10.1177/1532673X03251197
- Davis R, Justices and Journalists: The U.S. Supreme Court and the Media (Cambridge University Press 2011). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511977480
- De Jaegere J, Judicial Review and Strategic Behaviour: An Empirical Case Law Analysis of the Belgian Constitutional Court (Intersentia 2019). DOI: 10.1017/9781780688619
- Dederke J, ‘CJEU Judgments in the News – Capturing the Public Salience of Decisions of the EU’s Highest Court’ (2022) 29 Journal of European Public Policy 609 <
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13501763.2021.1872682 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2021.1872682 - Dworkin R, ‘Hard Cases’ (1975) 88 Harvard Law Review 1057. DOI: 10.2307/1340249
- Dyevre A, ‘Unifying the Field of Comparative Judicial Politics: Towards a General Theory of Judicial Behaviour’ (2010) 2 European Political Science Review 297 <
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-political-science-review/article/unifying-the-field-of-comparative-judicial-politics-towards-a-general-theory-of-judicial-behaviour/5E9483B673AEB2AC4321E7B55988922E > accessed 24 August 2021. DOI: 10.1017/S1755773910000044 - Epstein L, ‘Some Thoughts on the Study of Judicial Behavior’ (2016) 57 William & Mary Law Review 2017. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102209-152921
- Epstein L,
‘Ideology and the Study of Judicial Behavior’ in Jon Hanson (ed), John Jost, Ideology, Psychology, and Law (Oxford University Press 2012) <http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199737512.001.0001/acprof-9780199737512-chapter-27 > accessed 15 April 2018 - Epstein L and Jacobi T, ‘The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Decisions’ (2010) 6 Annual Review of Law and Social Science 341 <
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-102209-152921 > accessed 25 April 2023 - Epstein L and Martin AD, ‘Does Public Opinion Influence the Supreme Court – Possibly Yes (But We’re Not Sure Why)’ (2010) 13 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 263
- Ferejohn J, ‘Judicializing Politics, Politicizing Law’ (2002) 65 Law and Contemporary Problems 41. DOI: 10.2307/1192402
- Ferejohn JA, Rosenbluth FM and Shipan CR, ‘Comparative Judicial Politics’ (Social Science Research Network 2004) SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 1154123 <
https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1154123 > accessed 15 April 2018. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1154123 - Flemming RB and Wood BD, ‘The Public and the Supreme Court: Individual Justice Responsiveness to American Policy Moods’ (1997) 41 American Journal of Political Science 468 <
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2111773 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.2307/2111773 - Friedman B, The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution (Farrar, Straus and Giroux 2009)
- Garoupa N and Ginsburg T, Judicial Reputation: A Comparative Theory (University of Chicago Press 2015). DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226290621.001.0001
- Gillman H,
‘Courts and the Politics of Partisan Coalitions’ in Keith E Whittington, R Daniel Kelemen and Gregory A Caldeira (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics (Oxford University Press 2010). DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199208425.003.0037 - Ginsburg T and Versteeg M, ‘Why Do Countries Adopt Constitutional Review?’ (2014) 30 The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 587. DOI: 10.1093/jleo/ewt008
- Guo L, Vu HT and McCombs M,
‘An Expanded Perspective on Agenda-Setting Effects Exploring the Third Level of Agenda Setting.’ [2012] Revista de Comunicación - Hanych M,
‘Zobrazování Práva v Médiích: Mediální Reprezentace Rozhodování Vrcholných Českých Soudů ve Vybraných Médiích’ (Masarykova univerzita 2020) <https://is.muni.cz/auth/th/gribt/ > - Hapla M and Friedel T, Profesní etika právníků. (Nugis Finem Publishing, 2022)
- Helmke G, ‘The Logic of Strategic Defection: Court–Executive Relations in Argentina Under Dictatorship and Democracy’ (2002) 96 American Political Science Review 291. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055402000175
- Jackson VC,
‘Judicial Independence: Structure, Context, Attitude’ in Anja Seibert-Fohr (ed), Judicial Independence in Transition, vol 233 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2012) <http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-642-28299-7_2 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-28299-7_2 - Johnson B and Strother L, ‘The Supreme Court’s (Surprising?) Indifference to Public Opinion’ (2021) 74 Political Research Quarterly 18. DOI: 10.1177/1065912920958080
- Judgment of the Slovak Constitutional Court, PL. ÚS 7/2017-159, 31 May 2017-
- Koch-Baumgarten S and Voltmer K (eds), Public Policy and the Mass Media (0 edn, Routledge 2010) <
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781135168025 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.4324/9780203858493 - Kosař D, Perils of judicial self-government in transitional societies: holding the least accountable branch to account (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781316282519
- Kühn Z,
‘The Czech Constitutional Court in Times of Populism: From Judicial Activism to Judicial Self-Restraint’ , Populist Challenges to Constitutional Interpretation in Europe and Beyond (Routledge 2021). DOI: 10.4324/9781003148944-8 - Lax JR, ‘The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine’ (2011) 14 Annual Review of Political Science 131. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.042108.134842
- Liebes T, ‘Inside a News Item: A Dispute Over Framing’ (2000) 17 Political Communication 295. DOI: 10.1080/105846000414296
- Macfarlane E, Governing from the Bench: The Supreme Court of Canada and the Judicial Role (UBC Press 2013). DOI: 10.59962/9780774823524
- Madsen MR and others, ‘Sovereignty, Substance, and Public Support for European Courts’
- Madsen MR, Nicola F and Vauchez A (eds), Researching the European Court of Justice: Methodological Shifts and Law’s Embeddedness (Cambridge University Press 2022). DOI: 10.1017/9781009049818
- Magalhães PC and others, ‘Beyond the Myth of Legality? Framing Effects and Public Reactions to High Court Decisions in Europe’ (2023) 56 Comparative Political Studies 1537. DOI: 10.1177/00104140231152769
- McCombs M, Setting the Agenda: Mass Media and Public Opinion (John Wiley & Sons 2014)
- Meyer P, ‘Transparency and Strategic Promotion: How Court Press Releases Facilitate Judicial Agenda-Building in Germany’ (2022) 48 Public Relations Review 102228. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102228
- Nelson TE, Clawson RA and Oxley ZM, ‘Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance’ (1997) 91 American Political Science Review 567. DOI: 10.2307/2952075
- Pearson M and Polden M, The Journalist’s Guide to Media Law (5th edn, A&U Academic 2014)
- Perse EM and Lambe J, Media Effects and Society (Routledge 2016). DOI: 10.4324/9780203854693
- Posner RA, How Judges Think (Harvard University Press 2008) <
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674048065 > accessed 17 January 2018 - Ríos-Figueroa J, ‘Fragmentation of Power and the Emergence of an Effective Judiciary in Mexico, 1994–2002’ (2007) 49 Latin American Politics and Society 31. DOI: 10.1111/j.1548-2456.2007.tb00373.x
- Segal JA,
‘Judicial Behavior’ in Daniel R Kelemen and Gregory A Caldeira (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics (Oxford University Press 2010). DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199208425.003.0002 - Segal JA and Spaeth HJ, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited (1st edn, Cambridge University Press 2002) <
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9780511615696/type/book > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511615696 - Smekal H, Benák J and Vyhnánek L, ‘Through Selective Activism towards Greater Resilience: The Czech Constitutional Court’s Interventions into High Politics in the Age of Populism’ (2022) 26 The International Journal of Human Rights 1230 <
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13642987.2021.2003337 > accessed 11 March 2023. DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2021.2003337 - Solberg RS and Waltenburg EN, The Media, the Court, and the Misrepresentation: The New Myth of the Court (1 edition, Routledge 2014). DOI: 10.4324/9780203551721
- Staton JK, Judicial Power and Strategic Communication in Mexico (1 edition, Cambridge University Press 2010). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511750632
- Sternberg S and others, ‘Zum Einfluss Der Öffentlichen Meinung Auf Entscheidungen Des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Eine Analyse von Abstrakten Normenkontrollen Sowie Bund-Länder-Streitigkeiten 1974 – 2010’ (2015) 56 Politische Vierteljahresschrift 570 <
http://www.nomos-elibrary.de/index.php?doi=10.5771/0032-3470-2015-4-570 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.5771/0032-3470-2015-4-570 - Strother L, ‘How Expected Political and Legal Impact Drive Media Coverage of Supreme Court Cases’ (2017) 34 Political Communication 571. DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2017.1306817
- Sullivan B and Feldbrin R, ‘The Supreme Court and the People: Communicating Decisions to the Public’ (8 February 2022) <
https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4043189 > accessed 17 August 2022 - Sunstein CR, Are Judges Political?: An Empirical Analysis of the Federal Judiciary (Brookings Institution Press 2006)
- Tate CN and Vallinder T (eds), The Global Expansion of Judicial Power (New York University Press 1995)
- Ura JD, ‘Backlash and Legitimation: Macro Political Responses to Supreme Court Decisions’ (2014) 58 American Journal of Political Science 110 <
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajps.12048 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12048 - Ura JD and Wohlfarth PC, ‘“An Appeal to the People”: Public Opinion and Congressional Support for the Supreme Court’ (2010) 72 The Journal of Politics 939 <
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1017/S0022381610000459 > accessed 25 April 2023. DOI: 10.1017/S0022381610000459 - Vanberg G,
‘The Politics of Constitutional Review in Germany’ (Cambridge University Press 2004). DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511510427 - Vanberg G, ‘Constitutional Courts in Comparative Perspective: A Theoretical Assessment’ (2015) 18 Annual Review of Political Science 167. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-040113-161150
- Walgrave S and Aelst PV, ‘The Contingency of the Mass Media’s Political Agenda Setting Power: Toward a Preliminary Theory’ (2006) 56 Journal of Communication 88. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00005.x
- Watt G, The Making Sense of Politics, Media, and Law: Rhetorical Performance as Invention, Creation, Production (Cambridge University Press 2023) <
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/making-sense-of-politics-media-and-law/AA28C61253A5DA5E00B4F0BDE129F571 > accessed 30 October 2023 - Stanisław Goźdź-Roszkowski and Gianluca Pontrandolfo (Eds.):
Law, Language and the Courtroom—Legal Linguistics and the Discourse of Judges , Routledge, Abingdon, 2022. 245 Pp., ISBN: 978–1-003–15377-1 (Ebk)’ (2023) 36 International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 369. DOI: 10.1007/s11196-022-09956-9 - Zilis MA, The Limits of Legitimacy: Dissenting Opinions, Media Coverage, and Public Responses to Supreme Court Decisions (University of Michigan Press 2015). DOI: 10.3998/mpub.7835032
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.528 | Journal eISSN: 2156-7964
Language: English
Page range: 2 - 2
Published on: Dec 11, 2023
Published by: International Association for Court Administration
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
© 2023 Monika Hanych, Hubert Smekal, Jaroslav Benák, published by International Association for Court Administration
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.