Collective choice and dissenting opinions in Multimember Courts.: Elements for Assessing Judicial reasoning in Courts of Constitutional decision making in South America

• Andrés Fernando Mejía Restrepo ^[2] ; Liliana Damaris Pabón Giraldo ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Medellín

     Universidad de Medellín

     Colombia

     
  2. [2] Universidad Libre Seccional Pereira
• Localización: Estudios constitucionales: Revista del Centro de Estudios Constitucionales, ISSN 0718-0195, ISSN-e 0718-5200, Año 21, Nº 1, 2023, págs. 142-168
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.4067/s0718-52002023000100142
• Títulos paralelos:
  • ecisión colectiva y opiniones disidentes en Tribunales Colegiados.: Elementos para evaluar el razonamiento judicial de los Tribunales de decisión Constitucional en Suramérica
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • Collegial decisions are exposed to peculiarities that individual judges do not face, such as deliberations, leading judges as case managers, group thinking, and peer effects, among others. Nevertheless, when analyzing judicial outcomes of Constitutional Courts, most of the legal community in South America does not consider those features. In this paper, we describe some of them and focus on dissents as a variable that provides fertile ground for assessing the reasoning of the tribunals. The scope of the work is limited to a descriptive and normative sphere, and uses a qualitative methodology.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Alder, John (2000): “Dissents in Courts of Last Resort”, in Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (20, 2), pp. 221-246.
  • Arrow, Kenneth J. (2012): Social Choice and Individual Values (New Haven, Yale University Press).
  • Austen-Smith, David and Banks, Jeffrey S. (1996): “Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem”, in The American...
  • Baum, Lawrence (2006): Judges and their Audiences – A Perspective on Judicial Behavior (Princeton, Princeton University Press).
  • Berra, Elisabeth (2010): “La acción meramente declarativa”, in Revista Jurídica (14), pp. 90- 101.
  • Bickel, Alexander M. (1986): The Least Dangerous Branch. The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics (New Haven, Yale University Press).
  • Black, Henry Campbell (2018): Handbook on The Law of Judicial Precedents, Or The Science Of Case Law (Forgotten Books, London).
  • Bonneau, Chris W.; Hammond, Thomas H.; Maltzman, Forrest and Wahlbeck, Paul J. (2007): “Agenda Control, the Median Justice, and the Majority...
  • Boyd, Christina L.; Epstein, Lee and Martin, Andrew D. (2010): “Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging”, in American Journal of Political...
  • Brennan, William J. (1986): “In Defense of Dissents”, in Hastings Law Journal (37), pp. 427- 438.
  • Bricker, Benjamin (2017): “Breaking the Principle of Secrecy: An Examination of Judicial Dissent in the European Constitutional Courts”, in...
  • Cameron, Charles M. and Kornhauser, Lewis A (2010): “Modeling Collegial Courts (3): Adjudication Equilibria (Revised)”, in NYU School of Law,...
  • Caminker, Evan H. (1999): “Sincere and Strategic Voting Norms on Multimember Courts”, in Michigan Law Review (97, 8), pp. 2297-2380.
  • Cappelletti, Mauro (1962): Ideologie Nel Diritto Processuale. In: Conference at the University of Macerata.
  • Carrubba, Cliff; Friedman, Barry; Martin, Andrew D., and Vanberg, Georg (2012): “Who Controls the Content of Supreme Court Opinions?”, in...
  • Caviedes, Cristóbal (2022): “A core case for supermajority rules in constitutional adjudication”, in International Journal of Constitutional...
  • Cohen, Mathilde (2014): “Ex Ante Versus Ex Post Deliberations: Two Models of Judicial Deliberations in Courts of Last Resort”, in American...
  • Da Silva, Virgílio Afonso (2013): “Deciding without deliberating”, in International Journal of Constitutional Law (11, 3), pp. 557-584.
  • De Condorcet, Nicolas (2014): Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pluralité des voix (Cambridge,...
  • Devins, Neal (2008): “Ideological Cohesion and Precedent (Or Why the Court Only Cares About Precedent When Most Justices Agree With Each Other)”,...
  • Dunoff, Jeffrey and Pollack, Mark (2022): “The Road Not Taken: Comparative International Judicial Dissent”, in American Journal of International...
  • Dworkin, Ronald (1986): Law’s Empire (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).
  • Dyevre, Arthur (2010): “Unifying the field of comparative judicial politics: towards a general theory of judicial behaviour”, in European...
  • Dyevre, Arthur and Jakab, András (2013): “Foreword: Understanding Constitutional Reasoning”, in German Law Journal (14), pp. 983-1015.
  • Dyevre, Arthur and Jakab, András (2013): “Domestic judicial non-compliance in the European Union: a Political Economic Approach”, in LSE law,...
  • Easterbrook, Frank H. (1982): “Ways of Criticizing the Court”, in Harvard Law Review (95), pp. 802-832.
  • Engst, Benjamin G. (2021): The Two Faces of Judicial Power: Dynamics of Judicial-Political Bargaining (Cham, Palgrave Macmillan).
  • Epstein, Lee and Knight, Jack (2022): “How social identity and social diversity affect judging”, in Leiden Journal of International Law (35,...
  • Epstein, Lee and Knight, Jack (2000): “Toward a Strategic Revolution in Judicial Politics: A Look Back, A Look Ahead”, in Political Research...
  • Epstein, Lee and Weinshall, Keren (2021): “The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Behavior: A Comparative Perspective” (Cambridge, Cambridge University...
  • Epstein, Lee; Landes, William M. and Posner, Richard (2013): The Behavior of Federal Judges: A Theoretical & Empirical Study of Rational...
  • Epstein, Lee; Landes, William M. and Posner, Richard (2011): “Why (And When) Judges Dissent: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”, in Journal...
  • Epstein, Lee and Shvetsova, Olga (2002): “Heresthetical Maneuvering on the US Supreme Court”, in Journal of Theoretical Politics (14, 1),...
  • Ernst, Wolfgang; Gsell, Beate; Häcker, Birke and Rüfner, Thomas (2020): “Concluding Remarks”, in Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective....
  • Friedman, Barry; Lemos, Margaret H.; Martin, Andrew D.; Clark, Tom S.; Orr Larsen, Allison and Harvey, Anna (2020): Judicial Decision-Making...
  • Garoupa, Nuno and Santos Botelho, Catarina (2022): “Judicial Dissent in Collegial Courts: Theory and Evidence”, in Oxford Research Encyclopedia...
  • Gragl, Paul (2023): “The faceless court? The role of individual CJEU members”, in Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (0, 0),...
  • Grimm, Dieter (2003): “To be a Constitutional Court Judge”, in Distinguished Fellow Lecture Series (9 J.H.H. Weiler ed.)
  • Hâcker, Birke and Ernst, Wolfgang (eds.) (2020): “The Fine-Mechanics of Judicial Majoritarianism”, In Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective....
  • Handelsman, Jed (2003): “A Six-Three Rule: Reviving Consensus and Deference on the Supreme Court”, in Georgia Law Review (37, 3), pp. 893-1019.
  • Harding, Andrew; Leyland, Peter and Groppi, Tania (2009): “Constitutional Courts: Forms, Functions and Practice in Comparative Perspective”,...
  • Hazelton, Morgan L. W. and Hinkle, Rachael K. (2017): The Elevator Effect: How Collegiality Impacts Dissent. [Available in: http:// mjnelson.org/papers/HHN.Elevator.Effect.pdf]....
  • Henderson, M. Todd (2007): “From Seriatim to Consensus and Back Again: A Theory of Dissent”, in Supreme Court Review, pp. 283-330.
  • Hirschl, Ran (2014): Comparative Matters, The Renaissance of Comparative Constitutional Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
  • Janis, Irvis L. (1972): Victims of Groupthinking: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (Boston, Houghton Mifflin...
  • Jakab, András (2013): “Judicial Reasoning in Constitutional Courts: A European Perspective”, in German Law Journal (14), pp. 1215-1275.
  • Jakab, András; Dyevre, Arthur and Itzcovich, Giulio (2017): Comparative Constitutional Reasoning (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).
  • JUDICON research project. [Available in: https://judicon.tk.hu/en/project-description] [Consulting date: July 7, 2022].
  • JUDICON-EU comparative project. [Available in: https://judiconeu.uni-nke.hu/about] [Consulting date: July 7, 2022].
  • Kahneman, Daniel; Sibony, Olivier and Sunstein, Cass R. (2021): Noise A Flaw in Human Judgment (New York, Little, Brown, Spark).
  • Kastellec, Jonathan P. (2013): “Racial Diversity and Judicial Influence on Appellate Courts”, in American Journal of Political Science (57,...
  • Kelemen, Katalin (2013): “Dissenting Opinions in Constitutional Courts”, in German Law Journal (14, 8), pp. 1345- 1371.
  • Kelemen, Katalin (2018): Judicial Dissent In European Constitutional Courts: A comparative and Legal Perspective (London, Routledge Taylor...
  • Kelsen, Hans (1967): Pure Theory of Law (trs Max Knight, University of California Press).
  • Kim, Pauline T. (2009): “Deliberation and Strategy on the United States Courts of Appeals: An Empirical Exploration of Panel Effects”, in...
  • Kornhauser, Lewis A. and Sager, Lawrence G (1986): “Unpacking the Court”, in Yale Law Journal (96, 1), pp. 82-117.
  • Kornhauser, Lewis A. and Sager, Lawrence G (1993): “The One and The Many: Adjudication in Collegial Courts”, in California Law Review (81,...
  • Kornhauser, Lewis A. and Sager, Lawrence G (2004): “The Many as One: Integrity and Group Choice In Paradoxical Cases”, in Philosophy &...
  • Lax, Jeffrey R. (2011): “The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine”, in Annual Review of Political Science (14), pp. 131-157.
  • Lieblich, Eliav (2021): “How to Do Research in International Law? A Basic Guide for Beginners”, in Harvard International Law Journal (62),...
  • List, Christian and Pettit, Philip (2005): “On the Many as One: A Reply to Kornhauser and Sager”, in Philosophy & Public Affairs (33,...
  • Maučec, Gregor and Dothan, Shai (2022): “Judicial Dissent at the International Criminal Court: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”, in...
  • Mistry, Hemi (2023): “A Performative Theory of Judicial Dissent”, in The Modern Law Review (86, 3), pp. 729-755.
  • Muro, Sergio; Amaral-Garcia, Sofía; Chehtman, Alejandro and Garoupa, Nuno (2020): “Exploring dissent in the Supreme Court of Argentina”, in...
  • Nash, Jonathan (2022): “Measuring Judicial Collegiality Through Dissent”, in Buffalo Law Review (70, 4), pp. 1561-1635.
  • Peresie, Jennifer L. (2005): “Female Judges Matter: Gender and Collegial Decision making in the Federal Appellate Courts”, in Yale Law Journal...
  • Perugini, Laura (2010): “La Acción Declarativa de Inconstitucionalidad y la Acción Meramente Declarativa. Explicación Necesaria de sus Diferencias”,...
  • Rawls, John (1993): Political Liberalism (New York, Columbia University Press).
  • Revesz, Richard L. (1997): “Environmental Regulation, Ideology, and the D. C. Circuit”, in Virginia Law Review (83, 8), pp. 1717-1772.
  • Roach Anleu, Sharyn and Mack, Kathy (2012): “Trial Courts and Adjudication”, in The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research (Peter Cane...
  • Rogers, Owen (2022): “‘I beg to differ’: Are our courts too agreeable?”, in South African Law Journal (139, 2), pp. 300-339.
  • Stack, Kevin M. (1996): “The Practice of Dissent in The Supreme Court”, in Yale Law Journal (105, 8), pp. 2235-2259.
  • Stadelmann, Thomas (2020): “Collective Judging at the Swiss Supreme Court”, in Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective. Counting Votes...
  • Staton, Jeffrey K. and Vanberg, Georg (2008): “The Value of Vagueness: Delegation, Defiance, and Judicial Opinions”, in American Journal of...
  • Satvinder, Juss S. (2022): “Religious Satire, Moral Restraint and the Charlie Hebdo Cartoons”, in Human Rights Quarterly (44, 1), pp. 142-167.
  • Stone Sweet, Alec (2000): Governing with Judges (Oxford, Oxford University Press).
  • Sunstein, Cass R. (2005): “Group Judgments: Statistical Means, Deliberation, and Information Markets”, in New York University Law Review (80),...
  • Sunstein, Cass R.; Schkade, David; Ellman, Lisa M. and Sawicki, Andres (2006): Are Judges Political? An Empirical Analysis of the Federal...
  • Vanberg, Georg (2001): “Legislative-Judicial Relations: A Game-Theoretic Approach to Constitutional Review”, in American Journal of Political...
  • Venice Commission (2018): Report on separate opinions of constitutional courts, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 117th Plenary Session...
  • Waldron, Jeremy (2014): “Five to Four: Why do Bare Majorities Rule on Courts?”, in Yale Law Journal (123, 6), pp. 1692-1730.