Do Judges Incorrectly Assume Political Attitudes?
Judicial politics refers to the study of how courts and judges operate within political systems and how judicial decision-making both shapes and is shaped by political forces. Judicial politics examines the role of courts and judges within constitutional democracies and the interaction between legal decision-making and political power. Democratic systems are founded on the majority principle, yet no contemporary constitutional democracy relies on majoritarianism alone. To preserve anti-majoritarian commitments—most notably fundamental rights, constitutional limits, and the rule of law—democracies empower courts, particularly constitutional or supreme courts, to review and invalidate actions of elected branches. This authority inevitably places courts at the center of political conflict. In several systems, including the United States, deeply divisive issues such as abortion, electoral rules, and marriage equality are routinely resolved through judicial intervention, making courts prominent political actors and shifting governance from purely majoritarian to partially anti-majoritarian politics.
This prominence raises a central theoretical question: whether judicial politics is simply ordinary politics exercised in a different institutional forum, or whether it constitutes a distinct form of politics governed by its own norms. Judicial politics is generally understood as a specialized domain structured by the ideals, ideologies, practices, and procedures of adjudication. Judges operate within constraints of legal reasoning, precedent, institutional role, and professional norms, which differentiate their political engagement from that of legislators or executives. Disagreement within judicial politics often concerns interpretive methodologies—such as originalism versus adaptive or living constitutionalism—that do not necessarily correspond to partisan alignments in ordinary politics.
Exceptional cases in which courts appear to abandon these constraints and engage directly in partisan outcomes highlight the normative boundaries of legitimate judicial action. Such episodes underscore the distinction between judicial politics, which is grounded in legal justification and institutional restraint, and overt ordinary politics, which is driven primarily by electoral competition and policy preference. Judicial politics scholarship focuses on identifying and explaining these boundaries and the conditions under which they are maintained or breached.
As a field, judicial politics applies the classic definition of politics—“who gets what, why, and how”—to courts. It analyzes how judges and judicial institutions participate in the allocation of authority, rights, and resources. Core areas of inquiry include judicial decision-making processes, appointment and selection mechanisms, interactions with legislatures and executives, and the reception of judicial decisions by the public, all of which shape perceptions of legitimacy and authority. Given the judiciary’s relative insulation from direct electoral control and its significant policy impact, understanding its operation is of central importance to constitutional governance.
Extensive research at the intersection of law and social science demonstrates that political attitudes can influence judicial decision-making, particularly in salient and closely contested cases. Judges, however, typically emphasize legal determinacy and deny the relevance of politics, reflecting both professional socialization and concern for institutional legitimacy. In routine cases, especially in lower courts constrained by precedent, political attitudes may play a limited role, contributing to divergent assessments between judges and political scientists.
Comparative constitutional experience further illustrates judicial politics. In India, the Supreme Court’s decision in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) articulated the Basic Structure Doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution. By asserting judicial review over constitutional amendments and later shaping institutions such as the judicial appointment process, the Court assumed a decisive political role in constraining parliamentary supremacy. Judicial politics thus captures the enduring tension between democracy and constitutionalism, and the pivotal role courts play in mediating that relationship.
Bibliography
Angell, Alan. 2007. Democracy After Pinochet: Politics, Parties, and Elections in Chile. London: University of London Press.
Basta, Karlo, John McGarry, and Richard Simeon, eds. 2015. Territorial Pluralism: Managing Difference in Multinational States. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Baum, Lawrence. 2011. Specializing the Courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bruff, Harold H. 2015. Untrodden Ground: How Presidents Interpret the Constitution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Courtney, John C. 2004. Elections. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Crabtree, John, ed. 2011. Fractured Politics: Peruvian Democracy Past and Present. London: University of London Press.
Cross, William P., ed. 2010. Auditing Canadian Democracy. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Crosskey, William W. 2026. Politics and the Constitution in the History of the United States, Volume 3: The Political Background of the Federal Convention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. 2026. Politics and the Constitution in the History of the United States, Volumes 1 and 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
DeWiel, Boris. 2000. Democracy: A History of Ideas. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Downs, Donald Alexander. 1992. The New Politics of Pornography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Epp, Charles R. 2010. Making Rights Real: Activists, Bureaucrats, and the Creation of the Legalistic State. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fish, Stanley. 2014. Versions of Academic Freedom: From Professionalism to Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gibson, James L. 2012. Electing Judges: The Surprising Effects of Campaigning on Judicial Legitimacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jacobs, Mark D. 1990. Screwing the System and Making it Work: Juvenile Justice in the No-Fault Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jones, Robert, and Richard Wyn Jones. 2023. The Welsh Criminal Justice System: On the Jagged Edge. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Kahane, David, Daniel Weinstock, Dominique Leydet, and Melissa Williams, eds. 2009. Deliberative Democracy in Practice. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Keck, Thomas M. 2014. Judicial Politics in Polarized Times. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. 2004. The Most Activist Supreme Court in History: The Road to Modern Judicial Conservatism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kelly, James B. 2024. Constraining the Court: Judicial Power and Policy Implementation in the Charter Era. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
King, Nancy J., and Joseph L. Hoffmann. 2011. Habeas for the Twenty-First Century: Uses, Abuses, and the Future of the Great Writ. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kinzo, Maria D’Alva G., and James Dunkerley, eds. 2003. Brazil Since 1985: Economy, Polity and Society. London: University of London Press.
Kislowicz, Howard, Richard J. Moon, and Kerri Anne Froc, eds. 2024. Canada’s Surprising Constitution: Unexpected Interpretations of the Constitution Act, 1982. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Knight, Alan, and Wil Pansters, eds. 2006. Caciquismo in Twentieth-Century Mexico. London: University of London Press.
Kyed, Helene Maria, ed. 2020. Everyday Justice in Myanmar: Informal Resolutions and State Evasion in a Time of Contested Transition. Singapore: Nus Press Pte Ltd.
Levi, Edward H. 2013. Restoring Justice: The Speeches of Attorney General Edward H. Levi. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lovell, George I. 2012. This Is Not Civil Rights: Discovering Rights Talk in 1939 America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Marti i Puig, Salvador, Reynaldo Yunuen Ortega Ortiz, M. Fernanda Somuano Ventura, and Claire Wright, eds. 2014. Democracy in Mexico: Attitudes and Perceptions of Citizens at National and Local Level. London: University of London Press.
McCann, Michael W. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McMahon, Kevin J. 2011. Nixon’s Court: His Challenge to Judicial Liberalism and Its Political Consequences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. 2003. Reconsidering Roosevelt on Race: How the Presidency Paved the Road to Brown. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. 2024. A Supreme Court Unlike Any Other: The Deepening Divide Between the Justices and the People. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Moukawsher, Thomas G. 2023. The Common Flaw: Needless Complexity in the Courts and 50 Ways to Reduce It. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University Press.
Neuberger, David, and Peter Riddell. 2019. The Power of Judges. London: Haus Publishing.
Pashman, Howard. 2018. *Building a Revolutionary State: The Legal Transformation of New York, 1776-1783*. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Patel, Gautam. 2022. Undermining the Idea of India. London: Seagull Books.
Peltzman, Sam. 1998. Political Participation and Government Regulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ramseyer, J. Mark, and Eric B. Rasmusen. 2003. Measuring Judicial Independence: The Political Economy of Judging in Japan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rosenberg, Gerald N. 2023. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Scheppele, Kim Lane. 1990. Legal Secrets: Equality and Efficiency in the Common Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sherman, Michael, and Gordon J. Hawkins. 1983. Imprisonment in America: Choosing the Future. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Shrivastava, Meenal, and Lorna Stefanick, eds. 2015. Alberta Oil and the Decline of Democracy in Canada. Edmonton: University of British Columbia Press.
Slocum, Brian G., and Francis J. Mootz III, eds. 2019. Justice Scalia: Rhetoric and the Rule of Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Southworth, Ann. 2008. Lawyers of the Right: Professionalizing the Conservative Coalition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Staudt, Nancy. 2011. The Judicial Power of the Purse: How Courts Fund National Defense in Times of Crisis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Strauss, David A., Geoffrey R. Stone, and Justin Driver, eds. 2020. The Supreme Court Review, 2019. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Journals.
Sunstein, Cass R., Reid Hastie, John W. Payne, David A. Schkade, and W. Kip Viscusi. 2002. Punitive Damages: How Juries Decide. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yeazell, Stephen C. 2018. Lawsuits in a Market Economy: The Evolution of Civil Litigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tanmoy Bhattacharyya
December 15, 2025
