DDRO 25A42 - Comparative Judicial Politics: Governing with Judges
DDRO 25A42 · Semestre de printemps 2025-2026
- Langue d'enseignement
- English
- Type d'enseignement
- Cours séminaire
- Nombre d'heures
- 24
- Crédits
- 5
Informations
Descriptif
The Comparative Judicial Politics course will examine core political science questions concerning judicial decision making and judicial power: What explains the judicialization of politics? To what extent do ideological and strategic considerations influence how judges decide cases? Under what conditions are courts able to constrain other political actors? What is the policy impact of judicial decisions and what can judges do to increase their impact? This is not a course on constitutional adjudication, and the focus will not be on doctrinal analysis or close reading of cases (though cases will be discussed to illustrate and examine the topics of the course). Instead, courts will be conceptualized as political institutions and judges as political actors. The course will cover topics such as the government of judges, constraints on judicial power; conflicts between constitutional courts and the other branches of government; decision making within the judicial hierarchy; judicial appointments. After having examined the fundamentals of constitutional courts, the course will compare models of judicial review through various case studies: the USA strong model, the Kelsenian model as applied in France, Italy, Germany and Spain, the Commonwealth and the Nordic weak models, the Irish hybrid model, the Latin America model(s), the Canadian and Israeli activist models, the new democracies model(s). The course will finally address contemporary challenges to judicial review such as popular constitutionalism and the lack of diversity on the bench.
Pré-requis
All course materials will be uploaded on the Sciences Po Moodle.
Mode de validation
The module is run as a seminar. That means that everyone is expected to attend every class having completed the readings, ready to participate.
The assessment will consist of two marks:
- 40% of final mark: A mark will assess the quality and regularity of students’ participation in class and their understanding of, and ability to respond to, the assigned readings each week.
- 60% of final mark: a final take-home examination to be submitted within a strict time limit while working off-campus. 2 or 3 essay questions. Students are allowed to consult their own notes, course texts and other materials as with open book exams. The length of papers is limited to a set number of words to ensure fairness among students.
Lectures
Lectures principales 5
-
Alec Stone Sweet (2000), Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe, Oxford University Press.
-
Allan R. Brewer-Carías (2014), Constitutional Protection of Human Rights in Latin America: A Comparative Study of Amparo Proceedings, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
-
Mark Tushnet (2000), Taking the Constitution Away From the Courts, Princeton University Press.
-
Neal Tate C., Torbjorn Vallinder (1997), The Global Expansion of Judicial Power, New York University Press.
-
Ran Hirsch (2004), Towards Juristocracy. The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism, Harvard University Press.
Lectures secondaires 10
-
Adrian Vermeule (2011), The System of the Constitution, Oxford University Press.
-
Allan R. Brewer- Carías (1989), Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
-
Charles M. Fombad (ed.) (2017), Constitutional Adjudication in Africa, Oxford University Press, coll. « Stellenbosch Handbooks in African Constitutional Law ».
-
Francisco Fernández Segado (2009), La Justicia constitucional. Una visión de derecho comparado, Dykinson, 3 Vol.
-
Georg Vanberg (2005), The Politics of Constitutional Review in Germany, Cambridge University Press.
-
Guillaume Tusseau (2009), Contre les « modèles » de justice constitutionnelle. Essai de critique méthodologique / Modelli di giustizia costituzionale. Saggio di critica metodologica, pref. L. Pegoraro, éd. bilingue, trad. it. A. Morandini, Bononia University Press, coll. « Ricerce di diritto comparato ».
-
Jon Elster (2013), Securities Against Misrule: Juries, Assemblies and Elections, Cambridge University Press.
-
Maartje De Visser (2014), Constitutional Review in Europe. A Comparative Analysis, Hart.
-
Mauro Cappelletti (1971), Judicial Review in the Contemporary World, The Bobbs- Merrill Company.
-
Niels Petersen (2017), Proportionality and Judicial Activism, Fundamental Rights Adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa, Cambridge University Press.
Unités pédagogiques
| N° d'UP | Type d'UP | Unités pédagogiques | Enseignants | Nombre d'heures | Crédits |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55172 | Cours séminaire | Comparative judicial politics | Nefeli LEFKOPOULOU | 24 | 5 |
Enseignants
- Nefeli LEFKOPOULOU
Dans les maquettes
- Bachelor, Programme d'échange, semestre 4, seminaires - 25/26COLLÈGE UNIVERSITAIRE - CAMPUS PARIS
- Bachelor, semestre 4, 25/26 : cours séminairesCOLLÈGE UNIVERSITAIRE - CAMPUS PARIS
Contacts et ressources
- Contact pédagogique
- KERROUCHI Karima