Skip Navigation
UT wordmark
College of Liberal Arts wordmark
government masthead
Robert G. Moser, Chair BAT 2.116, Mailcode A1800, Austin, TX 78712 • 512-471-5121

Fall 2005

GOV 384N • Comparative Judicial Politics

Unique Days Time Location Instructor
37930 TH
3:30 PM-6:30 PM
PAR 305

Course Description

Consent of the Graduate Adviser must be obtained. Graduate standing required. Course number may be repeated for credit when the topics vary. Much has been written recently about the increasing judicialization of politics. But is it really happening? And if so, what is it? Is judicialization good, bad or indifferent? Good for whom? This course examines the role of courts and law in political systems around the world. We begin with an examination of the basic logic of courts and law, and cover such topics as the differences across legal traditions, the creation of constitutional courts, the nature of judicial decision-making, judicial independence, the capacity of courts to effect social change, etc. The ultimate goal is to understand the conditions under which courts are or become consequential actors within the overall social and political system. We will address such questions as, who benefits when courts become more important? Who is really behind increases in judicial power? Can we realistically expect courts to act on behalf of minorities, and if so, which minorities? The course should be relevant to those with an interest in comparative law and legal systems, comparative judicial behavior, the role of courts in politics and society, and the rule of law around the world. Because courts are, in the end, just another institution, the course should also be relevant to those interested in comparative institutional analyses more generally. The readings will include materials on courts around the world, from the US and the rest of North America, to Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Europe.

Grading Policy



Rosenberg, Hollow Hope. Shapiro, Courts: A Comparative & Political Analysis. Ginsburg, Judicial Review in New Democracies. Segal & Spaeth, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited.


bottom border