IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v14y2018i1p43n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Advocates General Political? An Empirical Analysis of the Voting Behavior of the Advocates General at the European Court of Justice

Author

Listed:
  • Frankenreiter Jens

    (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn, Germany)

Abstract

The question whether political preferences of EU Member States play a role in the decision-making of the members of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has so far gone largely unanswered in the literature. This paper formally tests the hypothesis that the political preferences of Member State governments are reflected in the decisions of the Advocates General, who are judge-like members of the ECJ. The empirical analysis is motivated by a novel model of the interaction between the Advocate General and the judicial panel. Based on this model, the paper develops a formal test to answer whether there is a relationship between the policy preferences of EU Member State governments with regard to European integration and the decision behavior of Advocates General appointed by these governments. It then tests this hypothesis using a newly assembled dataset combining information on agreements and disagreements between the opinions issued by the Advocates General and the ensuing judgments of the ECJ in preliminary ruling proceedings with information on political preferences of Member State governments obtained from party manifesto data. The results of this test suggest that the votes of Advocates General reflect the political preferences of the appointing governments vis-à-vis European integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Frankenreiter Jens, 2018. "Are Advocates General Political? An Empirical Analysis of the Voting Behavior of the Advocates General at the European Court of Justice," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-43, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:14:y:2018:i:1:p:43:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2016-0037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2016-0037
    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-2016-0037?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. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2010. "The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design Is Taking the Con out of Econometrics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 3-30, Spring.
    2. Matthew C. Stephenson, 2009. "Legal Realism for Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(2), pages 191-211, Spring.
    3. Voeten, Erik, 2007. "The Politics of International Judicial Appointments: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 669-701, October.
    4. Joshua B. Fischman, 2011. "Estimating Preferences of Circuit Judges: A Model of Consensus Voting," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(4), pages 781-809.
    5. Carrubba, Clifford J. & Gabel, Matthew & Hankla, Charles, 2008. "Judicial Behavior under Political Constraints: Evidence from the European Court of Justice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 435-452, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christina Davis, 2015. "The political logic of dispute settlement: Introduction to the special issue," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 107-117, June.
    2. Wessel Wijtvliet & Arthur Dyevre, 2021. "Judicial ideology in economic cases: Evidence from the General Court of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 25-45, March.
    3. Ryan Brutger & Julia Morse, 2015. "Balancing law and politics: Judicial incentives in WTO dispute settlement," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 179-205, June.
    4. Erik Voeten, 2010. "Borrowing and Nonborrowing among International Courts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(2), pages 547-576.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. KAMKOUM, Arnaud Cedric, 2023. "The Federal Reserve’s Response to the Global Financial Crisis and its Effects: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis of the Impact of its Quantitative Easing Programs," Thesis Commons d7pvg, Center for Open Science.
    7. Álvaro Bustos & Tonja Jacobi, 2014. "A Theory of Judicial Retirement," Documentos de Trabajo 451, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    8. Christopher J. Ruhm, 2019. "Shackling the Identification Police?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(4), pages 1016-1026, April.
    9. Christos Genakos & Andreas Lamprinidis & James Walker, 2023. "Evaluating merger effects," CEP Discussion Papers dp1921, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Katherine Sawyer & Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham & William Reed, 2017. "The Role of External Support in Civil War Termination," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(6), pages 1174-1202, July.
    11. Annette N. Brown & Drew B. Cameron & Benjamin D. K. Wood, 2014. "Quality evidence for policymaking: I'll believe it when I see the replication," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 215-235, September.
    12. Goerke, Laszlo & Neugart, Michael, 2015. "Lobbying and dismissal dispute resolution systems," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 50-62.
    13. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    14. Carsten Hefeker & Michael Neugart, 2016. "Policy deviations, uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 547-567, December.
    15. Arthur Charpentier & Emmanuel Flachaire & Antoine Ly, 2017. "Econom\'etrie et Machine Learning," Papers 1708.06992, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2018.
    16. Deshpande, Ashwini & Desrochers, Alain & Ksoll, Christopher & Shonchoy, Abu S., 2017. "The Impact of a Computer-based Adult Literacy Program on Literacy and Numeracy: Evidence from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 451-473.
    17. Chen, Daniel L. & Levonyan, Vardges & Yeh, Susan, 2016. "Policies Affect Preferences: Evidence from Random Variation in Abortion Jurisprudence," IAST Working Papers 16-58, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    18. Friberg, Richard & Romahn, André, 2015. "Divestiture requirements as a tool for competition policy: A case from the Swedish beer market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-18.
    19. Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2021. "Issue attention on international courts: Evidence from the European Court of Justice," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 793-815, October.
    20. Shamena Anwar & Patrick Bayer & Randi Hjalmarsson, 2019. "Politics in the Courtroom: Political Ideology and Jury Decision Making," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 834-875.

    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:14:y:2018:i:1:p:43:n:3. 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.