管理者、捍卫者、先驱者和合作者:民主衰落时代的法院

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW Law & Policy Pub Date : 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1111/lapo.12251
Michael A. Dichio, Igor Logvinenko
{"title":"管理者、捍卫者、先驱者和合作者:民主衰落时代的法院","authors":"Michael A. Dichio, Igor Logvinenko","doi":"10.1111/lapo.12251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this introductory essay to the special issue of <jats:italic>Law &amp; Policy</jats:italic>, “Global Perspectives on Judicial Politics and Democratic Backsliding,” we critically examine the paradoxical role of courts during episodes of democratic backsliding. Despite operating without direct democratic accountability—relying instead on legal precedents and doctrinal interpretations—courts are pivotal in defending democratic integrity during episodes of backsliding. This issue, featuring 10 articles by 15 scholars, offers a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of judicial politics of autocratization. Half of the articles deal directly with the U.S. judiciary, highlighting its unique standing that allows it to both enable and resist democratic backsliding. The other half of the issue explores case studies from Europe, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, highlighting a great deal of variability of tactics, approaches and outcomes. Published during a critical electoral year in 2024, this collection emphasizes the need for ongoing research into the judiciaries' dual capacity to both safeguard and undermine democratic norms.","PeriodicalId":47050,"journal":{"name":"Law & Policy","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stewards, defenders, progenitors, and collaborators: Courts in the age of democratic decline\",\"authors\":\"Michael A. Dichio, Igor Logvinenko\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/lapo.12251\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this introductory essay to the special issue of <jats:italic>Law &amp; Policy</jats:italic>, “Global Perspectives on Judicial Politics and Democratic Backsliding,” we critically examine the paradoxical role of courts during episodes of democratic backsliding. Despite operating without direct democratic accountability—relying instead on legal precedents and doctrinal interpretations—courts are pivotal in defending democratic integrity during episodes of backsliding. This issue, featuring 10 articles by 15 scholars, offers a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of judicial politics of autocratization. Half of the articles deal directly with the U.S. judiciary, highlighting its unique standing that allows it to both enable and resist democratic backsliding. The other half of the issue explores case studies from Europe, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, highlighting a great deal of variability of tactics, approaches and outcomes. Published during a critical electoral year in 2024, this collection emphasizes the need for ongoing research into the judiciaries' dual capacity to both safeguard and undermine democratic norms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Policy\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12251\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12251","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在《法律与amp; 政策》特刊 "司法政治与民主倒退的全球视角 "的这篇介绍性文章中,我们以批判的眼光审视了法院在民主倒退时期所扮演的矛盾角色。尽管法院的运作不直接接受民主问责,而是依赖于法律先例和理论解释,但法院在倒退事件中捍卫民主完整性的作用举足轻重。本期刊载了 15 位学者的 10 篇文章,对专制化的司法政治进行了全面而细致的分析。其中一半文章直接涉及美国司法机构,强调其独特的地位使其既能促成民主倒退,又能抵制民主倒退。本期的另一半文章探讨了欧洲、东南亚和拉丁美洲的案例研究,强调了策略、方法和结果的巨大差异。本文集出版于 2024 年的关键选举年,强调有必要持续研究司法机构既维护又破坏民主规范的双重能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Stewards, defenders, progenitors, and collaborators: Courts in the age of democratic decline
In this introductory essay to the special issue of Law & Policy, “Global Perspectives on Judicial Politics and Democratic Backsliding,” we critically examine the paradoxical role of courts during episodes of democratic backsliding. Despite operating without direct democratic accountability—relying instead on legal precedents and doctrinal interpretations—courts are pivotal in defending democratic integrity during episodes of backsliding. This issue, featuring 10 articles by 15 scholars, offers a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of judicial politics of autocratization. Half of the articles deal directly with the U.S. judiciary, highlighting its unique standing that allows it to both enable and resist democratic backsliding. The other half of the issue explores case studies from Europe, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, highlighting a great deal of variability of tactics, approaches and outcomes. Published during a critical electoral year in 2024, this collection emphasizes the need for ongoing research into the judiciaries' dual capacity to both safeguard and undermine democratic norms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
15.40%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: International and interdisciplinary in scope, Law & Policy embraces varied research methodologies that interrogate law, governance, and public policy worldwide. Law & Policy makes a vital contribution to the current dialogue on contemporary policy by publishing innovative, peer-reviewed articles on such critical topics as • government and self-regulation • health • environment • family • gender • taxation and finance • legal decision-making • criminal justice • human rights
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Does racial impact statement reform reduce Black–White disparities in imprisonment: Mixed methods evidence from Minnesota Stewards, defenders, progenitors, and collaborators: Courts in the age of democratic decline Judicial transformation in a competitive authoritarian regime: Evidence from the Turkish case Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1