When Courts Dare to Dissent: Judicial Independence and the Power to Strike Down Laws
Impossibile aggiungere al carrello
Rimozione dalla Lista desideri non riuscita.
Non è stato possibile aggiungere il titolo alla Libreria
Non è stato possibile seguire il Podcast
Esecuzione del comando Non seguire più non riuscita
When Courts Dare to Dissent: Judicial Independence and the Power to Strike Down Laws
-
Letto da:
-
Di:
A proposito di questo titolo
Welcome back to the show. Today’s episode dives into a puzzle at the heart of constitutional democracy: why do some courts boldly strike down controversial laws, while others, facing similar laws, hold back. Scholars usually answer with one phrase—judicial independence—the idea that judges need protection from political pressure in order to make tough decisions against the government of the day.
Across the next ten minutes, this episode has three goals. First, to unpack what judicial independence really means in practice, and how it differs from judicial review itself. Second, to explain the article’s core claim that independence should be treated as a conditional factor that moderates the relationship between ideology and decisions, rather than just another additive variable in our models. Third, to explore what this conditional view tells us about famous US Supreme Court cases on important federal statutes, and what it implies for anyone who wants courts to both protect rights and remain accountable