Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSkiple, Jon Kåre
dc.contributor.authorBentsen, Henrik Litleré
dc.contributor.authorHanretty, Chris
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-05T12:23:30Z
dc.date.available2021-07-05T12:23:30Z
dc.date.created2021-02-17T18:26:49Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn0080-6757
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2763422
dc.description.abstractPast research has revealed conflicting findings regarding the degree to which judges on European apex courts enact their policy preferences or instead disagree on the basis of divergent legal views. We investigate disagreement between judges on the Norwegian Supreme Court between 1996 and 2016. During this period, the court dealt with a greater volume of policy-relevant cases than previously. The method of appointment to the court was also changed to a judicial appointments commission. We analyse non-unanimous cases using item response theory models. We find that judges are not divided along left–right lines but instead disagree about the appropriate degree of deference to give to public authorities. There is no significant association between the appointing government and judges' ideal points either before or after the reform to appointments. Judges who were formerly academics are however much less deferential than career judges or judges who were previously lawyers in private practice.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleThe Government Deference Dimension of Judicial Decision Making: Evidence from the Supreme Court of Norwayen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2020 The Authors.en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1467-9477.12176
dc.identifier.cristin1891089
dc.source.journalScandinavian Political Studiesen_US
dc.source.pagenumber264-285en_US
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Political Studies. 2020, 43 (4), 264-285.en_US
dc.source.volume43en_US
dc.source.issue4en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal