Different theories have been developed, mainly in the context of the United States, to explain judicial decision-making. In this respect, there is an important ongoing debate over whether judges are guided by the law or by personal ideology. The analysis of the decision-making in the Polish Constitutional Tribunal seems to support the existence of some party alignment. It is to say that judicia...

This note, which analyzes the central role of women’s health in the debate over the limits of abortion rights, explores the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Stenberg v. Carhart to invalidate a Nebraska statute banning partial birth abortion. Specifically, this note questions whether the Court’s decision in Stenberg effectively requires that all future statutes banning partial bir...

We examine the role of gender in legal decision making by applying critical mass theory to the U.S. federal district courts. We analyze whether behavioral differences manifest themselves in the decision-making proclivities of male and female judges, contingent on the existence of a critical mass of female judges at a court point (i.e., each city in which a district court is located). Our result...

In the paper, we tried to comprehensively define field of application prohibition reformatio in peius, and present theoretical, divergent, interpretations this provision, as well try illustrate all with practice both regular constitutional courts. We have seen that provision Article 400 Montenegrin Code Criminal Procedure is not enough be interpreted only linguistically. This hides much more. F...

-

Bail Information Schemes gather and provide information on a defendant’s community ties to the court. Past evaluations have concluded that schemes are effective because more defendants are granted bail. However, the evaluations include possible confounds and other limitations, thus threatening the validity of their findings. They are also incompatible with research showing that magistrates do n...

Among the major decisions any legal system must make is deciding whether to establish general courts with broad jurisdiction, or specialized limited jurisdiction. Under one influential argument—advanced by both judges and theorists—general foster coherence within system. This Article identifies a distinct effect of establishing courts: “complementarity effect.” In case complementarity, strategi...

Two studies were conducted to determine how real felony court judges decide the amount of bail to set. In the first, the judges were presented with fictitious case histories containing the relevant information in a factorial design. In the second, multiple regression techniques were used to examine the impact of different kinds of information on decisions made by judges in actual bail hearings....

Existing literature highlights that constitutional courts influence lawmakers’ policy choices without actively intervening in the policymaking process. Lawmakers know may scrutinize their acts and have incentives to amend policies pre-empt judicial interventions. However, evidence suggests lawmakers are not always prepared sacrifice objectives avoid censure from courts. I develop a formal model...