Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
April 19, 2026Comparative Politics

Monitoring High Court Rulings in New Democracies

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

PVPablo Valdivieso-KastnerUniversity of OxfordSBSantiago Basabe-Serrano

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

This article explains post-decision monitoring by high courts in new democracies, indicating the role of civil society.

Key Points

  • The article aims to explore when and why high courts in new democracies monitor compliance with their rulings.
  • Developed a theory of strategic monitoring by analyzing judges' responses to reputational risks.
  • Utilized an original dataset of 6,093 decisions from Ecuador’s Constitutional Court (2015–2024).
  • Assessed the effects of amicus curiae participation, budgetary resources, and political salience on monitoring likelihood.
  • Increased amicus curiae participation significantly raises the likelihood of monitoring by high courts.
  • Budgetary resources and political salience do not significantly affect monitoring decisions.
  • Courts prioritize cases prone to public scrutiny for compliance monitoring.

Cite This Study

Valdivieso-Kastner et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e4734c010ef96374d8f244https://doi.org/10.5129/001041526x17756005710020
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates1993 · 4,822 citations
  2. 2Measuring the Political Salience of Supreme Court Cases2015 · 108 citations
  3. 3Judges, Litigants, and the Politics of Rights Enforcement in Argentina2018 · 19 citations
  4. 4Explaining Federal Bureaucratic Compliance with Supreme Court Opinions1997 · 92 citations
  5. 5Rethinking judicial empowerment: The new foundations of constitutional justice2017 · 89 citations