IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v10y2014i2p32n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing Federal Conflicts: An Empirical Analysis of the Brazilian Supreme Court, 1988–2010

Author

Listed:
  • Arlota Carolina

    (School of Law, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA)

  • Garoupa Nuno

    (College of Law, University of Illinois at Urbana, Urbana, IL, USA)

Abstract

We test the extent to which political variables can explain judicial behavior in the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) when dealing with conflicts between the federal government (namely, the union) and the states. One view argues that we should expect some alignment between the political preferences of the justices and the success of the union primarily due to the appointment mechanism. The opposite view suggests that there should be no systematic alignment between the political preferences of the justices and the success of the union as a consequence of political insulation. We built an original dataset encompassing different types of constitutional actions judged between 1988 and 2010 by the STF. Our research focuses fundamentally on the alignment between revealed judicial preferences when adjudicating cases and presidential appointments in Brazil. We find some evidence that judicial preferences do matter, but the patterns of politicization are weaker than in other similar courts. We also discuss the implications of our findings for comparative judicial politics; in particular, we do not observe strong partisanship.

Suggested Citation

  • Arlota Carolina & Garoupa Nuno, 2014. "Addressing Federal Conflicts: An Empirical Analysis of the Brazilian Supreme Court, 1988–2010," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-32, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:10:y:2014:i:2:p:32:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2013-0037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2013-0037
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rle-2013-0037?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sofia Amaral-Garcia & Nuno Garoupa & Veronica Grembi, 2009. "Judicial Independence and Party Politics in Constitutional Courts: The Case of Portugal," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/301515, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Jenna Bednar, 2004. "Judicial Predictability and Federal Stability," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(4), pages 423-446, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Keren Weinshall‐Margel, 2011. "Attitudinal and Neo‐Institutional Models of Supreme Court Decision Making: An Empirical and Comparative Perspective from Israel," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 556-586, September.
    2. Pierre Bentata & Romain Espinosa & Yolande Hiriart, 2019. "Correction Activities by France’s Supreme Courts and Control over their Dockets," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 129(2), pages 169-204.
    3. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    4. Dimitrova-Grajzl Valentina & Grajzl Peter & Zajc Katarina & Sustersic Janez, 2012. "Judicial Incentives and Performance at Lower Courts: Evidence from Slovenian Judge-Level Data," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 215-252, August.
    5. Jan Fałkowski & Jacek Lewkowicz, 2022. "In practice or just on paper? Some insights on using alphabetical rule to assign judges to cases," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 405-430, December.
    6. Sofia Amaral‐Garcia & Nuno Garoupa & Veronica Grembi, 2009. "Judicial Independence and Party Politics in the Kelsenian Constitutional Courts: The Case of Portugal," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 381-404, June.
    7. repec:gig:joupla:v:6:y:2014:i:2:p:139-164 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Padovano, Fabio & Fiorino, Nadia, 2012. "Strategic delegation and “judicial couples” in the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 215-223.
    9. Amaral-Garcia Sofia & Garoupa Nuno, 2017. "Judicial Behavior and Devolution at the Privy Council," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(3), pages 1-40, November.
    10. Espinosa Romain, 2017. "Constitutional Judicial Behavior: Exploring the Determinants of the Decisions of the French Constitutional Council," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-41, July.
    11. Lars Hornuf & Lars Klöhn, 2018. "Do Judges Hate Speculators?," CESifo Working Paper Series 7375, CESifo.
    12. Fałkowski, Jan & Lewkowicz, Jacek, 2021. "Are Adjudication Panels Strategically Selected? The Case of Constitutional Court in Poland," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    13. Nuno Garoupa & Marian Gili & Fernando Gómez‐Pomar, 2012. "Political Influence and Career Judges: An Empirical Analysis of Administrative Review by the Spanish Supreme Court," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 795-826, December.
    14. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    15. repec:gig:joupla:v:3:y:2011:i:2:p:107-140 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Daniele Bertolini, 2019. "Constitutionalizing Leviathan: A Critique of Buchanan’s Conception of Lawmaking," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 41-69, October.
    17. Keren Weinshall & Udi Sommer & Ya'acov Ritov, 2018. "Ideological influences on governance and regulation: The comparative case of supreme courts," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 334-352, September.
    18. Lars Hornuf & Lars Klöhn, 2019. "Do judges hate speculators?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 147-169, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:10:y:2014:i:2:p:32:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.