Corruption,Party Leaders,and Candidate Selection: Evidence from Italy

Research indicates that voters are not particularly effective at removing corrupt politicians from office, in part because voters make decisions on the basis of many competing factors. Party leaders are much more single-minded than voters and will choose to deselect implicated legislators if it means maintaining a positive party reputation and improving the odds of winning a legislative majority. We examine renominations to Italy’s legislature in two periods marked by corruption. We compare these renomination patterns with those from the prior legislature, when corruption lacked political salience. Our analysis shows that incumbent renominations are negatively associated with the number of press mentions that link the incumbent to corruption—but only when corruption is salient to the public. Our study highlights the importance of party leaders in forcing malfeasant legislators out of office—and reducing corruption—and redirects attention from voters to political elites as a critical channel in enforcing democratic accountability.     

Arbitration Effect

Arbitration is changing the United States justice system. Critics argue that arbitration leads to claim suppression. Proponents argue that, compared with courts, arbitration is cheaper and less formal. These claims have not been empirically tested. In particular, whether and how arbitration impacts individuals’ decision to sue remains an open inquiry. This article for the first time shows, in a series of experiments, the impact of arbitration agreements on individuals' decisions to sue. This article calls it the “arbitration effect.” First, we test whether the arbitration effect exists; that is, if arbitration agreements negatively impact individuals' decision to sue. Second, we experimentally test individuals' decisions to opt out of arbitration agreements. Lastly, we assess whether any type of information can “cure” the arbitration effect. The results establish that individuals are less likely to sue in arbitration as opposed to court, hence the arbitration effect. Such an effect, however, does not exist at the contracting stage, meaning that individuals do not shun arbitration when given the option. Further, none of the fundamental attributes of arbitration, as touted by the U.S. Supreme Court, nor win-rates and class actions mitigate the arbitration effect. Equally, informational nudges do not reduce the effect, and individuals do not ascribe negative attributes to firms forcing mandatory arbitration. For decades, courts and lawmakers grappled with issues related to arbitration. The article provides much-needed data on arbitration. Findings cast serious doubts on the ongoing efforts—market-based, judicial, or regulatory—aiming to change the arbitration course.     

On the Frontlines: Making Decisions in Chinese Civil Environmental Lawsuits

This article looks at forty-two decisions in civil pollution cases in China as a window onto judges' political logic and the accompanying implications for environmental enforcement. The starting point is a typology of judicial decision making in one-party states based on two dimensions of decisions: the degree of legal formality (e.g., how closely judges adhere to the letter of the law) and individual autonomy (e.g., judges' power to make decisions in individual cases). Mapping pollution decisions onto this typology highlights shifting judicial strategy. While Chinese judges typically comply with instructions when the political pressure is dialed up, a combination of shifting incentives, uncertainty about the law, and political ambiguity can also allow de facto discretion in low-profile, run-of-the-mill cases. Everyday cases tend to cluster under the rubric of "rough justice" in which judges weigh competing political priorities and aim for a livable compromise that dents but upholds the status quo. This sample of cases also shows judges occasionally innovating at the margins by offering new legal interpretations or validating new types of claims. Although Chinese courts remain weak tools for environmental protection, limited innovation suggests that they can help nudge along local incremental social change.     

Authority,Nationality, and Minorities

Prominent normative theories for accommodating minority national groups appeal to the value of national cultures and/or the psychology of group recognition. This article aims to show that an argument from political authority provides a better justification. Building on Joseph Raz's theory of authority, the article argues that members of minority national groups are disadvantaged in relation to their majority counterparts under standard democratic institutions; such institutions do not provide minority national groups with comparable access to the conditions for legitimate political authority. Constitutional arrangements for accommodating minority national groups—such as territorial self‐government or power‐sharing—are justified insofar as they might offset this disadvantage.     

The Structure of American Legal Institutions and the Diffusion of Wrongful‐Discharge Laws, 1978–1999

This article evaluates how the social structure of American legal institutions influenced the diffusion of wrongful‐discharge laws over the period 1978–1999, and it assesses whether economic or political variables influenced the diffusion process. The results are surprising and quite striking. Precedents by other courts within the same federal circuit region were generally more influential in the diffusion process than precedents by courts in neighboring states or by courts within the same census or West legal reporting region, even though the precedents were on matters of state law rather than federal law and the decisions were usually made by state courts rather than federal courts. There is some limited evidence that political variables may also have been a factor, but economic variables were not statistically significant, even though the new employment laws may have had important economic consequences.     

Bilateral Investment Treaties,Credible Commitment,and the Rule of (International) Law: Do BITs Promote Foreign Direct Investment?

A long line of research, beginning with Macaulay's (1963) well‐known study of “Non‐Contractual Relations in Business,” suggests that the formal trappings of domestic law often have effects on private behavior that are, at best, “indirect, subtle, and ambiguous” ( Macaulay 1984 :155). Law and society scholars have spent somewhat less time exploring whether international law's effects on behavior are similarly attenuated. In this article I examine whether foreign investors take the presence of strong formal international legal protections into account when deciding where to invest. I focus on whether the presence of bilateral investment treaties, or BITs, meaningfully influences investment decisions. I present results from a statistical analysis that examines whether the formally strongest BITs—those that guarantee investors access to international arbitration to enforce investors' international legal rights—are associated with greater investment flows. I find no clear link between treaty protections and investment, a finding consistent with past law and society research but in tension with claims common in the BIT literature that the treaties should have dramatic effects on investor behavior.     

Theorizing about Trial Courts: Lawyers, Policymaking, and Tobacco Litigation

What role do litigation and trial court decisions play in shaping policy? This article explores that question by examining recent litigation against tobacco manufacturers filed by state attorneys general, plaintiff lawyers in class actions, lawyers for cities, unions, health plans, individual smokers, and others. I suggest how this litigation contributed to agenda setting, new ways of defining the problem, of tobacco and the policy alternatives, political mobilization, new legal norms, and new political and legal resources for opponents of tobacco. Addressing theoretical debates about the power of the courts to effect change, I distinguish between causal and constitutive arguments and suggest how both can be incorporated in social analysis.     

Progress, Unity, and Democracy: Dissolving Political Parties in Turkey

In this article, I analyze two cases where the Turkish Constitutional Court dissolved political parties during the 1990s. Specifically, I examine the cases against the Islamist Refah (Welfare/Well-Being) Party and the pro-Kurdish Halkin Emek Partisi (People's Labor Party). While the former was charged with threatening the secular basis of the national social order, the charges against the latter were around its allegedly separatist character. I engage in an in-depth analysis of the lines of argument in the indictments, arguments of defense deployed by the parties, and their ultimate contestations as they appeared in the final decisions by the Court. I see the Court as engaging with a medley of themes and tendencies, [trying to resolve them for the case at hand]. I argue that despite the differences in the construction of the alleged threats, in both cases the Court deployed a similar image of the ways in which social, political, and judicial terrains interact. A rather arbitrary boundary between the political and cultural domains informs these decisions. The Court operates with the understanding that once this boundary is transgressed, what may be harmless when an issue is cultural—such as the use of the headscarf or of the Kurdish language—may turn into a political symbol threatening the basis of the united, democratic, and progressive nation-state. In this vision, the concepts of democracy, progress, and unity are intimately tied together such that the threat to one of these concepts almost simultaneously constitutes a threat to the other two. The Court imagines itself as protecting the boundary between the political and cultural domains in an effort to uphold the right of a democracy to protect itself. This line of thought also enables the court's rather routine involvement in the political domain—which has brought about eighteen decisions for political party dissolution since 1980.     

The Legitimacy of New Risk Governance—A Critical View in Light of the EU's Approach to Nanotechnologies in Food

The objective of this article is to draw attention to legitimacy concerns raised by tendencies in EU risk regulation to supplement legislation with alternative regulatory options that are commonly captured under the umbrella term of ‘new governance’. To this end, the risk regulation of nanotechnologies in food serves as an empirical test case. The rise of nanotechnologies affects various societal actors and constitutes a highly controversial development due to the persistence of scientific uncertainties. To reach a compromise in the legislative process is, given the contradicting knowledge claims, a contentious and time‐consuming undertaking. This article, hence, shows that controversial decisions are not necessarily taken through the legislature—the European Parliament and the Council—but are settled, outside the political arena, in guidance documents or via non‐legislative acts. This article argues, relying on an understanding of legitimacy borrowed from Habermas and Scharpf, that despite ‘new governance’ ambitions in this direction the legitimacy of these measures is at best controversial.     

The religious conversion and race of a prisoner: Mock parole board members' decisions,perceptions, and emotions

Parole board members (PBMs) decide whether to release inmates on parole. Decisions may be affected by in‐group bias or stereotypes regarding religion and race. Two experiments investigated whether religious conversions/secular lifestyle changes and race affect mock PBMs' release decisions, emotions, and perceptions. Mock PBMs read a case file of an inmate who was eligible for parole and decided whether to grant parole. Study 1 manipulated whether the inmate had converted to Christianity or Islam, had a secular lifestyle change, or had no lifestyle change. Study 2 also varied race (African American or Caucasian). Race was not a significant factor, possibly because the manipulation was not strong enough to influence participants or because participants did not want to appear racist. Conversions to Islam and Christianity impacted the parole decision, and effects were mediated by believability of the conversion. Secular lifestyle changes affected release decisions and were mediated by perceptions of the inmate and beliefs about his likelihood of recidivism. Such inmates were the most likely to be released and were perceived most positively; their conversions were the most believable. Inmates who made no changes were perceived least positively, indicating that any lifestyle change is better than none. Importantly, no bias towards either religion (Islam, Christianity) was found. Furthermore, conversion type affected how scared PBMs were of the inmate, but this fear did not impact release decisions.     

The invisible chain: niche inheritance and unequal social reproduction in preindustrial continental Europe

A central aspect of the demographic transition model is discussed: the “chain between inheritance and reproduction,” which many historical demographers claim has kept population and resources in balance during the preindustrial period. The basic mechanism is well known: Economic space is thought to be divided into a limited number of self-sufficient positions or niches; since marriage required possession—usually by inheritance—of one such niche, overpopulation was avoided. The existence of this chain in preindustrial continental Europe has generally been taken for granted, although little is known about its actual workings. As a discussion of classical and current research shows, the chain should not be understood as encompassing entire demoeconomic systems at any time or place. Rather, niche mechanisms are relevant for the behavior of specific social groups and as communal or other political strategies. The need for alternative explanations of sociobiographic inequality—such as the impact of kinship on life-course decisions and chances—is emphasized.     

Market alternative to state activism in restoring the capitalist economy

The theory of economic transition is concerned less with the end product of building a capitalist economy than with intermediate solutions and the appropriate pace of institutional change. This article advances theoretical arguments on the advantages of a self-grown, evolutionary restoration of the capitalist economy in Eastern Europe or any country abandoning the socialist experiment. The article develops the point that of the two basic methods of setting up an economic order—the state or a market-type mechanism—only the latter can assure the emergence of a genuine, complete market. Further, it suggests that markets with self-interested individual actors at the center are not only superior to states in the allocation of scarce resources, be they economic or political, but are also the best vehicle for institution building.     

Obesity, courts, and the new politics of public health

Health care politics are changing. They increasingly focus not on avowedly public projects (such as building the health care infrastructure) but on regulating private behavior. Examples include tobacco, obesity, abortion, drug abuse, the right to die, and even a patient's relationship with his or her managed care organization. Regulating private behavior introduces a distinctive policy process; it alters the way we introduce (or frame) political issues and shifts many important decisions from the legislatures to the courts. In this article, we illustrate the politics of private regulation by following a dramatic case, obesity, through the political process. We describe how obesity evolved from a private matter to a political issue. We then assess how different political institutions have responded and conclude that courts will continue to take the leading role.     

Staggered Terms for the US Senate: Origins and Irony

This article provides the first detailed study of the origins of staggered Senate terms, which typically have been interpreted as part of the framers’ intent to create an insulated, stable, and conservative Senate. I draw upon three sources of evidence—the meaning and application of “rotation” in revolutionary America, the deliberations and decisions at the Constitutional Convention, and the arguments during Ratification—to show that the origins of and intentions behind staggered terms offer little support for the dominant interpretation. Instead, staggered terms, a mechanism to promote “rotation” or turnover of membership, were added to the Constitution as a compromise to offset, not augment, the Senate's longer terms by exposing a legislative chamber with long individual tenure to more frequent electoral influence and change.     

From European Integration to European Integrity: Should European Law Speak with Just One Voice?

Abstract: This article examines whether and how the moral principle of legal coherence or integrity, which has recently been developed further as a response to disagreement in the national legal context, applies to European law. According to the European integrity principle, all national and European authorities should make sure their decisions cohere with the past decisions of other European and national authorities that create and implement the law of a complex but single European legal order. Only by doing so, it is argued, can the European political and legal community gain true authority and legitimacy in the eyes of the European citizens to whom all these decisions apply. Although European integrity is primarily a product of European integration, it has gradually become one of the requirements of further integration. The article suggests that the principle of European integrity would help dealing with the growing pressure for common European solutions under conditions of increasing diversity. It places disagreement at the centre of European politics, as both an incentive and a means of integration by way of comparison and self‐reflectivity. It constitutes therefore the ideal instrument for a pluralist and flexible further constitutionalisation of the European Union.     

The Strategic Use of Formal Argumentation in Legal Decisions

In legal decisions standpoints can be supported by formal and also by substantive interpretative arguments. Formal arguments consist of reasons the weight or force of which is essentially dependent on the authoritativeness that the reasons may also have: In this connection one may think of linguistic and systemic arguments. On the other hand, substantive arguments are not backed up by authority, but consist of a direct invocation of moral, political, economic, or other social considerations. Formal arguments can be analyzed as exclusionary reasons: The authoritative character excludes—in principle—substantial counterarguments. Formal arguments are sometimes used to conceal value judgements based on substantial arguments. This paper deals with reconstructing problems regarding this strategic use of formal arguments in legal decisions, with a focus on linguistic argumentation.     

The Rule of Law,Comprehensive Doctrines,Overlapping Consensus,and the Future of Europe

For more than a decade now a profound rule-of-law crisis has gripped the European Union, and while the fight for the rule of law has topped not only the academic but also the judicial and political agenda, the results have been disappointingly meagre. This article argues that the main reason for that should be sought in a political strategic move of justifying the assaults on the rule of law by resorting to an “illiberal democracy.” This premeditated political narrative shift has unleashed onto the political sphere and onto public discourse at large comprehensive doctrines which had hitherto been left dormant thanks to an overlapping consensus on the rule of law as a central building block of the political conception of justice à la Rawls. Once this overlapping consensus was broken, the rule of law itself lost its neutral character as a referee on the right among the many conceptions of the good, itself becoming part of the highly politicized power play for dominance among irreconcilable—liberal and illiberal—comprehensive doctrines. The overlapping consensus in the EU is thus broken, but there are no conceptual reasons inherent to the rule of law itself for which it could not be rebuilt in the future.     

Multilateral cybersecurity governance: Divergent conceptualizations and its origin

Conventional wisdom holds that none of the main global challenges of the 21st century—whether it is climate change, nuclear weapons or cyber insecurity—can be adequately addressed without proper international cooperation. However, multilateral cooperation in many issue areas including cybersecurity is in a state of gridlock. Diverging conceptualizations of the subject matter has been offered as one driving factor behind the difficulty to cooperate at the international level.This paper contends that while international cooperation in cybersecurity has been difficult because of diverging definitions and conceptualizations of the subject, which are apparent in the international system, the problem grew into a state of gridlock because this divergence is anchored in the incompatibility of the ways in which major cyber powers organize their respective political systems at home. As such, it is argued that, the role of the multilateral system to bring about any significant progress in cybersecurity governance is very limited.     

Review, Revenge and Retreat

The article deals with a wide-ranging legal and political conflict of considerable constitutional significance, the attempt by UK ministers to restrict formal challenge of asylum decisions using a variety of devices and the fierce and partly successful opposition that this engendered. The article examines the legal and administrative roots of the controversy; the anatomy of the government's generalised counter-attack or 'revenge package'; the main juridical elements in the resulting public furore; and the character of the government's eventual retreat. In so doing, it raises, and elaborates on, a series of linked themes: the powerful dynamics of judicial review in this policy domain; the historical sense of a gathering storm in relations between ministers and judges; the practical interplay of rule of law arguments with developments in common law constitutionalism; and an expanded role for legal elements in the political process.