Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-17T06:21:40.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The political determinants of judicial dissent: evidence from the Chilean Constitutional Tribunal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2015

Lydia B. Tiede
Lydia B. Tiede*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA
*
*E-mail: lbtiede@uh.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many judicial scholars argue that judicial dissent stems from partisanship or political differences among judges on courts. These arguments are evaluated using the variation in political backgrounds on a constitutional court, Chile’s Constitutional Tribunal, using case-level and vote-level data from 1990 until 2010. The analysis shows that the rate of dissent rises after major reforms to the powers and judicial selection mechanism of the Tribunal in 2005 and that the dissent rate corresponds to periods of greater partisanship on the court. Further, decisions regarding the unconstitutionality of laws intensify the propensity to dissent at both the case and judge level. In further examination of variation across judges’ voting records, judges who have identifiable partisan associations of any kind are generally more likely to dissent than those with limited political backgrounds.

Keywords

constitutional courtsjudicial behaviorconflict
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , August 2016 , pp. 377 - 403
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amaral-Garcia, S., Garoupa, N. and Veronica, G. (2009), ‘Judicial independence and party politics in the Kelsenian constitutional courts: the case of Portugal’, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 6(2): 381–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autheman, V. (2004), “Global lessons learned: constitutional courts, Judicial Independence and the Rule of Law”, IFES Rule of Law White Paper Series. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Barros, R. (2002), Constitutionalism and Dictatorship, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, L. (2006), Judges and Their Audiences, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, L. (2010), The Supreme Court, 10th edn., Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Boyea, B.D. (2007), ‘Linking judicial selection to consensus an analysis of ideological diversity’, American Politics Research 35(5): 643–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brace, P.B. and Hall, M.G. (1993), ‘Integrated models of judicial dissent’, Journal of Politics 55: 914–935.Google Scholar
Brace, P., Langer, L. and Hall, M.G. (2000), ‘Measuring the preferences of state supreme court judges’, Journal of Politics 62: 387–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, S. and Spaeth, H. (1988), ‘Ideological position as a variable in the authoring of dissenting opinions on the Warren and Burger courts’, American Political Quarterly 16: 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brudney, J., Schiavoni, S. and Merrit, D. (1999), ‘Judicial hostility toward labor unions? Applying the social background model to a celebrated concern’, Ohio State Law Journal 60: 1675–1771.Google Scholar
Burns, J.M. (2010), Packing the Court: The Rise of Judicial Power and the Coming Crisis of the Supreme Court , London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Caldeira, G. and Zorn, C. (1998), ‘Of time and consensual norms in the supreme court’, American Journal of Political Science 42(3): 874–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carp, R., Stidham, R. and Manning, K. (2004), ‘Right on: the decision-making behavior of George W. Bush’s judicial appointees’, Judicature 88: 20–28.Google Scholar
Carp, R.A., Stidham, R. and Manning, K.L. (2011), Judicial Process in America, 8th edn., Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, R. and Tiede, L. (2012), ‘Ideological voting on Chile’s Constitutional Tribunal: dissent coalitions in the adjudication of rights’, Journal of Human Rights 11: 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S., Gulati, G.M. and Posner, E. (2010), ‘Professionals or politicians: the uncertain empirical case for an elected rather than appointed judiciary’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 26(2): 290–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemente, J., Montañés, A. and Reyes, M. (1998), ‘Testing for a unit root in variables with a double change in the mean’, Economics Letters 59(2): 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correa Sutil, J. (1993), ‘The judiciary and political system in Chile: the dilemmas of judicial independence during the transition to democracy’, in I. Stozky (eds), Transition to Democracy in Latin America: The Role of the Judiciary, Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Couso, J. (2004), ‘The politics of judicial review in Chile in the era of democratic transition, 1990–2002’, in S. Gloppen, R. Gargarella and E. Skaar (eds), Democratization and the Judiciary: The Accountability Function of Courts in New Democracies, London: Frank Cass Publishers.Google Scholar
Couso, J. (2005), ‘The judicialization of Chilean politics: the rights revolution that never was’, in R. Sieder, L. Schjolden and A. Angell (eds), The Judicialization of Politics in Latin America, New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Couso, J. and Coddou, A. (2010), ‘La natureleza jurídica de la acción de inaplicabilidad en la jurisprudencia del tribunal constitucional: un desafío pendiente’, Estudios Constitucionales 8(2): 389–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couso, J., Parmo, D.L., Guiloff, M. and Coddou, A. (2011), Constitutional Law in Chile, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Cross, F. and Tiller, E. (1998), ‘Judicial partisanship and obedience to legal doctrine: whistleblowing on the federal courts of appeal’, Yale Law Journal 107(7): 2155–2176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danelski, D. (1960), “The influence of the chief justice in the decisional process of the Supreme Court”. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Political Science Association, New York.Google Scholar
Danelski, D. (1986), ‘Causes and consequences of conflict and its resolution in the supreme court’, in C. Lamb and S. Goldman (eds), Judicial Conflict and Consensus: Behavioral Studies of American Appellate Courts, Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, pp. 21–49.Google Scholar
Domingo, P. (2000), ‘Judicial independence: the politics of the supreme court in Mexico’, Journal of Latin American Studies 32: 705, 712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, W. (1948), ‘Address to the American Bar Association’, in D. O’Brien (ed.), Judges on Judging: Views from the Bench, Washington, DC: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Dyevre, A. (2010), ‘Unifying the field of comparative judicial politics: towards a general theory of judicial behaviour’, European Political Science Review 2: 297–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, L. and Knight, J. (1998), The Choices Justices Make, CQ Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, L., Knight, J. and Shvetsova, O. (2001a), ‘The role of constitutional courts in the establishment and maintenance of democratic systems of government’, Law and Society Review 35(1): 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, L., Segal, J. and Spaeth, H. (2001b), ‘The norm of consensus on the U.S. supreme court’, American Journal of Political Science 45(2): 362–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, L., Landes, W. and Posner, R. (2011), ‘Why (and when) judges dissent: a theoretical and empirical analysis’, Journal of Legal Analysis 3(1): 101–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eskridge, W.N. Jr. (1991), ‘Overriding supreme court statutory interpretation decisions’, Yale Law Journal 101: 331–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueroa, D. (2013), ‘Constitutional review in chile revisited: a revolution in the making’, Duquesne Law Review 51: 387–419.Google Scholar
Frank, J. (1968), The Marble Palace, New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Garoupa, N.M. (2010), ‘Empirical legal studies and constitutional courts’, Indian Journal of Constitutional Law 5(1): 25–64.Google Scholar
Garoupa, N. and Ginsburg, T. (2010), “Building constitutional courts: party and judicial politics.” Working Paper Presented at the Comparative Judicial Studies Meeting in Bologna, Italy, June 2010.Google Scholar
Garoupa, N. and Ginsburg, T. (2012), ‘Building reputation in constitutional courts: party and judicial politics’, Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law 28(3): 539–568.Google Scholar
Garoupa, N., Grembi, V. and Lin, S.C. (2010), ‘Explaining constitutional review in new democracies: the case of Taiwan’, Pacific Rim Law and Policy Review 20(1): 1–40.Google Scholar
Garoupa, N., Gomez-Pomar, F. and Grembi, V. (2011), ‘Judging under political pressure: an empirical analysis of constitutional review voting in the Spanish constitutional court’, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 29(3): 513–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garoupa, N., Gili, M. and Gómez-Pomar, F. (2012), ‘Administrative review by the Spanish supreme court’, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 9(4): 795–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, T. (2001), ‘Court fixing’, Arizona Law Review 43: 9–62.Google Scholar
Gibson, J.L. and Caldeira, G. (2009), Citizens, Courts, and Confirmations: Positivity Theory and the Judgments of the American People, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, J., Calderia, G. and Baird, V. (1998), ‘On the legitimacy of national high courts’, American Political Science Review 92: 343–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, M.W., Hettinger, V.A. and Peppers, T. (2001), ‘Picking federal judges: a note on policy and partisan selection agendas’, Political Research Quarterly 54(3): 623–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goff, B. (2005), ‘Supreme court consensus and dissent: estimating the role of selection screen’, Public Choice 122: 483–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimm, D. (1994), ‘Human rights and judicial review in Germany’, in D.M. Beatty (ed.), Human Rights and Judicial Review: A Comparative Perspective, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 267–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (1996), Democracy and Disagreement, Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Hanretty, C. (2012), ‘Dissent in Iberia: the ideal points of justices on the Spanish and Portuguese Constitutional Tribunals’, European Journal of Political Research 51: 671–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiss, C. and Navia, P. (2007), ‘You win some, you lose some: constitutional reforms in Chile’s transition to democracy’, Latin American Politics and Society 49(3): 163–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmke, G. (2002), ‘The logic of strategic defection: court-executive relations in Argentina under dictatorship and democracy’, American Political Science Review 96: 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmke, G. (2005), Courts under Constraints: Judges, Generals, and Presidents in Argentina, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hettinger, V.A., Lindquist, S.A. and Martinek, W.L. (2004), ‘Comparing attitudinal and strategic accounts of dissenting behavior on the U.S. courts of appeals’, American Journal of Political Science 48(1): 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, D. (2002), ‘The promise(s) of deliberative democracy’, Rhetoric & Public Affairs 5: 223–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbink, L. (2007), Judges beyond Politics in Democracy and Dictatorship, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilbink, L. and Couso, J. (2011), ‘From quietism to incipient activism: the institutional and ideological roots of rights adjudication in Chile’, in G. Helmke and J. Ríos-Figueroa (eds), Courts in Latin America, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hurwitz, M.S. and Lanier, D.N. (2004), ‘I respectfully dissent: consensus, agendas, and policymaking on the U.S. supreme court, 1888–1999’, Review of Policy Research 21(3): 429–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iaryczower, M., Spiller, P. and Tommasi, M. (2002), ‘Judicial independence in unstable environments, Argentina 1935–1998’, American Journal of Political Science 46(4): 699–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaros, D. and Canon, B. (1971), ‘Dissent on state supreme courts: the differential significance of characteristics of judges’, Midwest Journal of Political Science 15: 322–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapiszewski, D. (2012), High Courts and Economic Governance in Argentina and Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapiszewski, D. and Taylor, M. (2008), ‘Doing courts justice? Studying judicial politics in Latin America’, Perspectives on Politics 6(4): 741–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelemen, K. (2013), ‘Dissenting opinions on constitutional courts’, German Law Journal 14(8): 1345–1372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laffranque, J. (2003), ‘Dissenting opinion and judicial independence’, Juridica International VIII: 162–172.Google Scholar
Magaloni, B. (2003), ‘Authoritarianism, democracy and the supreme court: horizontal exchange and the rule of law in Mexico’, in S. Mainwaring and C. Welna (eds), Democratic Accountability in Latin America, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.Google Scholar
Martin, A.D. and Quinn, K.M. (2002), ‘Dynamic ideal point estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Curt, 1953–1999’, Political Analysis. 10: 134–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merryman, J.H. and Pérez-Perdomo, R. (2007), The Civil Law Tradition, Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, N. (1971), The Court and Local Law Enforcement: The Impact of Miranda, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Montes, J. Esteban and Vial, T. (2005), The Role of Constitution-Building Processes in Democratization: Case Study Chile, Stockholm, Sweden: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.Google Scholar
Morgan, D.G. (1954), Justice William Johnson, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, S. (1964), ‘Court curbing periods in American history’,Vanderbilt Law Review 18: 925–944.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D. (2011), Storm Center, The Supreme Court in American Politics, 9th edn., New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, L. (2007), Politics in Chile: Socialism, Authoritarianism and Market Democracy, Boulder, CO: WestView Press.Google Scholar
Pardow, D. and Verdugo, S. (2013), “The Chilean constitutional court and the 2005 reform: a casting between career judges and academics.” Working paper, University of California, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrina, L.D. and Garoupa, N. (2013), ‘Choosing between the government and the regions: an empirical analysis of the Italian constitutional court decisions’, European Journal of Political Research 52(4): 431–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peress, M. (2009), ‘Small chamber ideal point estimation’, Political Analysis 17: 276–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, S. (1981), ‘Dissent in American courts’, Journal of Politics 43(2): 412–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeffer, E. (2005), Reformas Constitucionales 2005, Santiago: Editorial Jurídica.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C.H. (1948), The Roosevelt Court, New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohde, D. and Spaeth, H. (1976), Supreme Court Decision-making, San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Ríos-Figueroa, J. (2011), ‘Institutions for constitutional justice in Latin America’, in G. Helmke and J.R. Figueroa (eds), Courts in Latin America, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, C.K. and Carp, R.A. (1996), Politics and Judgment in Federal District Courts, Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Sadurski, W. (2008), Rights before Courts, A Study of Constitutional Courts in Postcommunist States of Central and Eastern Europe, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Salamone, M. (2014), ‘Judicial consensus and public opinion: conditional response to supreme court majority size’, Political Research Quarterly 67(2): 320–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidhauser, J. (1962), ‘ Stare Decisis, Dissent and the Background of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States’, University of Toronto Law Journal XIV(2): 194–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, H. (2000), The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post-Communist Europe, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Scribner, D. (2011), ‘Courts, power and rights in Argentina and Chile’, in G. Helmke and J. Ríos-Figueroa (eds), Courts in Latin America, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 248–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, J.A. and Cover, A.D. (1989), ‘Ideological values and the votes of U.S. supreme court justices’, American Political Science Review 83(2): 557–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, J.A. and Spaeth, H.J. (1993), The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Segal, J.A. and Spaeth, H.J. (2002), The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siavelis, P. (2000), The President and Congress in Post-Authoritarian Chile: Institutional Constraints to Democratic Consolidation, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Smyth, R. and Nayayan, P. (2004), ‘Hail to the chief! leadership and structural change in the level of consensus on the high court of Australia’, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 1(2): 399–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smyth, R. and Nayayan, P. (2006), ‘Multiple regime shifts in concurring and dissenting opinions on the U.S. Supreme Court’, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 3(1): 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solum, L. (2005), ‘Judicial selection: ideology versus character’, Cardozo Law Review 26: 659–689.Google Scholar
Songer, D. and Siripurapu, J. (2009), ‘The unanimous decisions of the supreme court of Canada as a test of the attitudinal model’, Canadian Journal of Political Science 42(1): 65–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staton, J. (2010), Judicial Power and Strategic Communication in Mexico, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swisher, C.B. (1935), Roger B. Taney, New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Ulmer, S. (1970), ‘Dissent behavior and the social background of supreme court justices.”’ The Journal of Politics 32: 580–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Winkle, S. (1997), “Dissent as a signal: evidence from the U.S. Court of Appeals.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Verdugo Ramírez, S. (2009), ‘El sello de constitucionalidad de los preceptos legales declarados constitucionales en el control preventivo’, Revista de Derecho y Ciencias Penales 13: 57–81.Google Scholar
Walker, T., Epstein, L. and Dixon, W. (1988), ‘On the mysterious demise of consensual norms in the United States Supreme Court’, Journal of Politics 50: 361–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, R. (2008), “Institutional considerations in locating norms of consensus: a cross-national investigation.” Working paper, University of Nevada.Google Scholar