IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v105y2011i02p397-414_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judicial Review as a Response to Political Posturing

Author

Listed:
  • FOX, JUSTIN
  • STEPHENSON, MATTHEW C.

Abstract

We use an agency model to analyze the impact of judicial review on the incentives of elected leaders to “posture†by enacting bold but ill-advised policies. We find that judicial review may exacerbate posturing by rescuing leaders from the consequences of unwise policies, but may also discourage posturing by alerting voters to unjustified government action. We further find that judges will defer to the decision of elected leaders unless posturing is sufficiently likely. We then show how judicial review affects voter welfare, both through its effect on policy choice and through its effect on the efficacy of the electoral process in selecting leaders. We also analyze how the desirability of judicial review is affected by characteristics of the leaders and the judges.

Suggested Citation

  • Fox, Justin & Stephenson, Matthew C., 2011. "Judicial Review as a Response to Political Posturing," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 397-414, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:105:y:2011:i:02:p:397-414_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055411000116/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Klein, Alexander & Crafts, Nicholas, 2023. "Unconditional Convergence in Manufacturing Productivity across U.S. States: What the Long-Run Data Show," CEPR Discussion Papers 18065, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Bhalotra, Sonia & Fernandez, Manuel, 2021. "The Right to Health and the Health Effects of Denials," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1376, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. Gabriele Gratton & Massimo Morelli, 2022. "Optimal Checks And Balances Under Policy Uncertainty," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 549-569, May.
    4. Gratton, Gabriele & Morelli, Massimo, 2020. "Optimal Checks and Balances Under Policy Uncertainty," CEPR Discussion Papers 14745, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Stephane Wolton, 2019. "Are Biased Media Bad for Democracy?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(3), pages 548-562, July.
    6. Katerina Linos & Kimberly Twist, 2016. "The Supreme Court, the Media, and Public Opinion: Comparing Experimental and Observational Methods," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 223-254.
    7. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2022. "Wisdom of the crowd? Information aggregation in representative democracy," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 86-95.
    8. Hisashi Sawaki, 2017. "Ideology signaling in electoral politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 48-68, January.
    9. Alvaro Forteza & Juan S. Pereyra, 2021. "Separation of powers with ideological parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 333-382, July.
    10. Howell, William & Shepsle, Kenneth & Wolton, Stephane, 2020. "Executive Absolutism: A Model," MPRA Paper 98221, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan & Landa, Dimitri, 2015. "Political accountability and sequential policymaking," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 95-108.
    12. Fu, Qiang & Li, Ming, 2014. "Reputation-concerned policy makers and institutional status quo bias," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-25.
    13. César Martinelli & John Duggan, 2014. "The Political Economy of Dynamic Elections: A Survey and Some New Results," Working Papers 1403, Centro de Investigacion Economica, ITAM.
    14. Tiberiu Dragu, 2017. "On repression and its effectiveness," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(4), pages 599-622, October.
    15. Elliott Ash & Massimo Morelli & Richard Van Weelden, 2015. "Elections and Divisiveness: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 21422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Liqun Liu, 2021. "The Politics of (No) Compromise: Information Acquisition, Policy Discretion, and Reputation," Papers 2111.00522, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    17. Ian R Turner, 2017. "Working smart and hard? Agency effort, judicial review, and policy precision," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 69-96, January.
    18. Justin Fox & Matthew C Stephenson, 2015. "The welfare effects of minority-protective judicial review," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(4), pages 499-521, October.
    19. Turner, Ian R, 2021. "Political Agency, Oversight, and Bias: The Instrumental Value of Politicized Policymaking," SocArXiv ebp5m, Center for Open Science.
    20. James R. Rogers & Joseph Daniel Ura, 2020. "A majoritarian basis for judicial countermajoritarianism," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(3), pages 435-459, July.
    21. Simon Lodato & Christos Mavridis & Federico Vaccari, 2024. "Political Pandering and Bureaucratic Influence," Papers 2402.17526, arXiv.org.
    22. Massimo Morelli & Richard Van Weelden, 2013. "Ideology and information in policymaking," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 25(3), pages 412-439, July.
    23. Joshua A. Strayhorn, 2020. "Ideological Competition and Conflict in the Judicial Hierarchy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 371-384, April.
    24. Andreas Grunewald & Emanuel Hansen & Gert Pönitzsch, 2020. "Political selection and the optimal concentration of political power," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(1), pages 273-311, July.

    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:cup:apsrev:v:105:y:2011:i:02:p:397-414_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.