IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ceasxx/v67y2015i6p970-988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judicial Disagreement need not be Political: Dissent on the Estonian Supreme Court

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Hanretty

Abstract

I investigate the non-unanimous decisions of judges on the Estonian Supreme Court. I argue that since judges on the court enjoy high de jure independence, dissent frequently, and are integrated in the normal judicial hierarchy, the Estonian Supreme Court is a crucial case for the presumption that judicial disagreement reveals policy preferences. I analyse dissenting opinions using an ideal point response model. Examining the characteristics of cases which discriminated with respect to the recovered dimension, I show that this dimension cannot be interpreted as a meaningful policy dimension, but instead reflects disagreement about the proper scope of constitutional redress.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Hanretty, 2015. "Judicial Disagreement need not be Political: Dissent on the Estonian Supreme Court," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(6), pages 970-988, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ceasxx:v:67:y:2015:i:6:p:970-988
    DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2015.1054260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09668136.2015.1054260
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09668136.2015.1054260?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Felipe de Mendonça Lopes, 2019. "Dissent Aversion and Sequential Voting in the Brazilian Supreme Court," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 933-954, December.
    2. Sofia Amaral-Garcia & Lucia Dalla Pellegrina & Nuno Garoupa, 2020. "Consensus and Ideology in Courts: an Application to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council," Working Papers 430, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2020.

    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:taf:ceasxx:v:67:y:2015:i:6:p:970-988. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ceas .

    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.