IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v22y2021i1p25-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judicial ideology in economic cases: Evidence from the General Court of the European Union

Author

Listed:
  • Wessel Wijtvliet

    (Centre for Empirical Jurisprudence, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium)

  • Arthur Dyevre

Abstract

We contribute new empirical evidence on the influence of ideology on the behaviour of European Union judges. As votes and other common proxies for judicial preferences are unavailable, we ask 46 competition law experts to rate the ideology of 51 judges who have served on the General Court of the European Union. The average ratings are then used to explain the outcome of competition and state aid cases (N = 655). We find that, consistent with research on United States courts, the pro-business score of the panel median is a significant predictor of General Court decisions in competition and state aid cases. We find less conclusive evidence for the influence of Europhilia. While showing that attitudes towards private business may matter more than Europhilia in economic cases, our analysis also suggests that expert ratings constitute a viable and promising alternative in settings where other measurement methods are unavailable.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:22:y:2021:i:1:p:25-45
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116520971343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116520971343
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116520971343?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kornhauser, Lewis A., 1992. "Modeling collegial courts I: Path-dependence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 169-185, June.
    2. Benoit, Kenneth & Conway, Drew & Lauderdale, Benjamin E. & Laver, Michael & Mikhaylov, Slava, 2016. "Crowd-sourced Text Analysis: Reproducible and Agile Production of Political Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(2), pages 278-295, May.
    3. Christina Zimmer & Gerald Schneider & Michael Dobbins, 2005. "The Contested Council: Conflict Dimensions of an Intergovernmental EU Institution," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 403-422, June.
    4. Simon Hix & Abdul Noury & Gérard Roland, 2006. "Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 494-520, April.
    5. Nofer, Michael & Hinz, Oliver, 2014. "Are Crowds on the Internet Wiser than Experts? The Case of a Stock Prediction Community," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 69935, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    6. Bonica, Adam & Sen, Maya, 2017. "A Common-Space Scaling of the American Judiciary and Legal Profession," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 114-121, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Larsson, Olof & Naurin, Daniel, 2016. "Judicial Independence and Political Uncertainty: How the Risk of Override Affects the Court of Justice of the EU," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(2), pages 377-408, April.
    9. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    10. Hanretty, Chris, 2013. "The Decisions and Ideal Points of British Law Lords," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 703-716, July.
    11. Angela Huyue Zhang & Jingchen Liu & Nuno Garoupa, 2018. "Judging In Europe: Do Legal Traditions Matter?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 144-178.
    12. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    13. Adam Bonica & Adam S. Chilton & Jacob Goldin & Kyle Rozema & Maya Sen, 2017. "Measuring Judicial Ideology Using Law Clerk Hiring," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 129-161.
    14. Adam Bonica & Maya Sen, "undated". "A Common-Space Scaling of the American Judiciary and Legal Profession," Working Paper 345856, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    15. Waldfogel, Joel, 1995. "The Selection Hypothesis and the Relationship between Trial and Plaintiff Victory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 229-260, April.
    16. 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.
    17. repec:oup:amlawe:v:19:y:2017:i:1:p:129-161 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Mark A. Pollack, 2001. "International Relations Theory and European Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 221-244, June.
    19. Segal, Jeffrey A. & Cover, Albert D., 1989. "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(2), pages 557-565, June.
    20. Voeten, Erik, 2008. "The Impartiality of International Judges: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 417-433, November.
    21. Christina Zimmer & Gerald Schneider & Michael Dobbins, 2005. "The Contested Council: Conflict Dimensions of an Intergovernmental EU Institution," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(2), pages 403-422, June.
    22. Stone Sweet, Alec & Brunell, Thomas, 2012. "The European Court of Justice, State Noncompliance, and the Politics of Override," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(1), pages 204-213, February.
    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. Spruk, Rok & Kovac, Mitja, 2019. "Replicating and extending Martin-Quinn scores," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. Christophe Crombez & Pieterjan Vangerven, 2014. "Procedural models of European Union politics: Contributions and suggestions for improvement," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 289-308, June.
    3. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Supranationalism, constrained? Locating the Court of Justice on the EU integration dimension," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 46-69, March.
    4. José Luis Castro-Montero & Edwin Alblas & Arthur Dyevre & Nicolas Lampach, 2018. "The Court of Justice and treaty revision: A case of strategic leniency?," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(4), pages 570-596, December.
    5. Christophe Crombez & Simon Hix, 2011. "Treaty reform and the Commission’s appointment and policy-making role in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(3), pages 291-314, September.
    6. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    7. Tim Veen, 2011. "The dimensionality and nature of conflict in European Union politics: On the characteristics of intergovernmental decision-making," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(1), pages 65-86, March.
    8. Guimaraesy, Bernardo & Meyerhof Salama, Bruno, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86146, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Christopher Wratil & Sara B Hobolt, 2019. "Public deliberations in the Council of the European Union: Introducing and validating DICEU," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 511-531, September.
    10. Karl-Oskar Lindgren & Thomas Persson, 2008. "The Structure of Conflict over EU Chemicals Policy," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 31-58, March.
    11. Guimarães, Bernardo de Vasconcellos & Salama, Bruno Meyerhof, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," Textos para discussão 440, FGV EESP - Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Fundação Getulio Vargas (Brazil).
    12. Adam Bonica & Adam Chilton & Jacob Goldin & Kyle Rozema & Maya Sen, 2019. "Legal Rasputins? Law Clerk Influence on Voting at the US Supreme Court," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 1-36.
    13. 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.
    14. Christina J. Schneider & Johannes Urpelainen, 2014. "Partisan Heterogeneity and International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 58(1), pages 120-142, February.
    15. 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.
    16. Alves, Amanda M. & Brousseau, Eric & Yeung, Timothy Yu-Cheong, 2021. "The dynamics of institution building: State aids, the European commission, and the court of justice of the European Union," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 836-859.
    17. Thomas Lehner & Fabio Wasserfallen, 2019. "Political conflict in the reform of the Eurozone," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 45-64, March.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Lauren Peritz, 2018. "Obstructing integration: Domestic politics and the European Court of Justice," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 427-457, September.

    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:sae:eeupol:v:22:y:2021:i:1:p:25-45. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.