Constituting and Regulating Democracy: Kenya's Electoral Commission and the Courts in the 2010s

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Richard Stacey ◽  
Victoria Miyandazi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Public Trust ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Election Results

Abstract In August 2017, responding to a petition from the losing candidate in the presidential election held days before, the Supreme Court of Kenya declared the results of the election null and void. Dramatic in itself, the decision stands in surprising contrast to the same Court's decision to uphold the 2013 election results following a similar petition. Beyond the different outcomes in 2013 and 2017, the Court's jurisprudential approach to the two petitions was markedly different. The Court showed significant deference to the Independent Elections and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) in 2013, and did not seriously interrogate its conclusion that the election had been free and fair. In 2017, however, the Court scrutinised the IEBC's process and paid close attention to the reasons it gave for declaring the result free and fair. This article considers the difference in the Court's approach in two ways. First, from a prescriptive perspective, it suggests when it is appropriate for courts to closely scrutinise the work of elections management boards and other ‘fourth branch’ institutions protecting democracy (IPDs). The article argues that where an IPD performs a function that is constitutive of rights, courts should be prepared to intervene. By contrast, where an IPD performs a function that is regulative of already constituted rights, courts of review should act with deference. On this basis, the article concludes that the Court should have engaged in a deeper review of the IEBC's 2013 decision. Second, from a descriptive perspective, the article suggests that the difference between the Court's 2013 and 2017 approaches can be explained by waning levels of public trust in the IEBC alongside growing levels of public confidence in the judiciary.

Neither the Purse Nor the Sword: Dynamics of Public Confidence in the Supreme Court

1986 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 1209-1226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Caldeira
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Cross Sections ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
The Public ◽  
Political Events ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Popularity ◽  
And Shifts ◽  
High Bench

Systematic study of changes in support for the U.S. Supreme Court across time has not been undertaken. Armed with a time series of observations from 1966 through 1984, I provide a description of the ebb and flow of public esteem for the Court. Then I outline and test several plausible propositions about the dynamics of support. Statistical analyses compel the conclusion that apart from a relatively constant core of support, increases in judicial activism, inflation, and solicitude for the rights of the accused decreased confidence in the Court; the events surrounding Watergate and increases in presidential popularity and the public salience of the Court brought about increased popular esteem for the high bench. Previous scholars, based on cross-sections of individuals, have emphasized the public's ignorance of and disinterest in the Supreme Court and judicial policy making. The responsiveness of public support for the Court in the aggregate to political events and shifts in the behavior of the justices stands in stark contrast to the conventional image of United States citizenry as singularly out of touch with and unmoved by the Supreme Court.

Theorizing the U.S. Supreme Court

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles M. Cameron ◽  
Lewis A. Kornhauser
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Voting Rule ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Judicial Studies ◽  
Judicial Actions

We summarize the formal theoretical literature on Supreme Court decision-making. We focus on two core questions: What does the Supreme Court of the United States do, and how can one model those actions; and, what do the justices of the Supreme Court want, and how can one model those preferences? Given the current state of play in judicial studies, these questions then direct this survey mostly to so-called separation of powers (SOP) models, and to studies of a multi-member (“collegial”) court employing the Supreme Court’s very distinctive and highly unusual voting rule.The survey makes four main points. First, it sets out a new taxonomy that unifies much of the literature by linking judicial actions, modeling conventions, and the treatment of the status quo. In addition, the taxonomy identifies some models that employ inconsistent assumptions about Supreme Court actions and consequences. Second, the discussion of judicial preferences clarifies the links between judicial actions and judicial preferences. It highlights the relationships between preferences over dispositions, preferences over rules, and preferences over social outcomes. And, it explicates the difference between consequential and expressive preferences. Third, the survey delineates the separate strands of SOP models. It suggests new possibilities for this seemingly well-explored line of inquiry. Fourth, the discussion of voting emphasizes the peculiar characteristics of the Supreme Court’s voting rule. The survey maps the movement from early models that ignored the special features of this rule, to more recent ones that embrace its features and explore the resulting (and unusual) incentive effects.

Neutrality of the State and Regulation of Religious Symbols in Schools in Quebec and France

2009 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Koussens
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Cultural Integration ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
Immigrant Populations ◽  
State Neutrality ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Difference

The difference in attitudes towards the wearing of religious symbols in schools in France and Canada is symptomatic of the respective legal and political definitions of the official neutrality of the school institution and thus of way in which laicism is used to regulate religious pluralism and the “socio-cultural” integration of immigrant populations. In what ways is state neutrality put into practice, in Quebec and in France, as regards the judicial and political treatment of the wearing of religious symbols in public schools? The author proposes to examine the implementation of the liberal principle of neutrality by the French law dated 15 March 2004 on the wearing of religious symbols in public schools and by the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada of 2 March 2006 to allow a young Sikh to wear his ritual kirpan at school.

scholarly journals Odpowiedzialność zakładu ubezpieczeń za szkody wyrządzone przez agenta ubezpieczeniowego

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 13-30
Author(s):  
Amanda Adamska ◽  
Anna Maria Barańska
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Insurance Company ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Insurance Agent ◽  
Insurance Intermediation ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Injured Party ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Definition Of

The responsibility of an insurance company for damages caused by an insurance agent The subject of this article is the responsibility of an insurance company for damages caused by an insurance agent in connection with the performance of agency activities. The Act on Insurance Intermediation of 22 May 2003 lays down a liability regime based on the principle of risk. It also contains the definition of an insurance agent and performed agency activities. In the next part of the article there is analysed the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court concerning the interpretation of article 11 1 of the abovementioned Act. It discusses an attempt at defining the difference between activities performed “in connection with” and “at the occasion of” other activities. Finally there is analysed an issue of the contribution of the injured party to the occurrence of the damage in this type of cases article 362 of the Civil Code.

scholarly journals Duties and Liability of the Members of the Supervisory Board of Limited Companies in Estonia: The First Cases from the Supreme Court of Estonia

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
Andres Vutt ◽  
Margit Vutt
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Supervisory Board ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Management Board ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Difference

Similarly to German law, Estonian company law provides two-tier management for all public limited companies. Legal regulation of the liability of members of the management board and supervisory board is the same, and therefore the question arises of whether there is any difference in liability between members of different boards. The Estonian Supreme Court recently made two decisions regarding the liability of members of the supervisory board. The main research question of the article is ‘what is the scope of the duties of the supervisory board in comparison to the duties of the management board, and how does the difference in duties affect the liability?’ As the main task of the supervisory board is to exercise supervision, the question is what the actual standard of supervision is. The main conclusions in the article are that the Supreme Court of Estonia has not given an answer to the question about the standard for the liability of members of the supervisory board and leaves open many other important questions about boundaries of their duties. 

scholarly journals Ballot Ontology

Non-Being ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 139-164
Author(s):  
Roberto Casati ◽  
Achille C. Varzi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Election Of 2000 ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Presidential Election

The US Presidential Election of 2000 was crucially decided in Florida. And, in Florida, the election might have been decided crucially by the question: is a dimple a hole? “Yes, it is”, so dimpled ballots are valid and ought to be counted. “No it isn’t”, and dimpled ballots must be rejected as invalid. If only one knew the answer! Where were the hole experts when we needed them? Eventually the manual recount was stopped by the Supreme Court. But we did learn something. We learned that even the destiny of a Presidential Election, if not more, might ultimately depend on one’s criteria for identifying holes—not their material surroundings, which everyone could detect, but the holes themselves.

Democrats will avoid block on US Supreme Court pick

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
Personal Influence ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Regulatory Powers

Significance President Donald Trump nominated Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death last year. Congressional Republicans blocked former President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy, Judge Merrick Garland, enabling Trump to name a conservative justice to set the balance of the Court after winning the presidential election. At least one Democratic senator has threatened to block Gorsuch’s appointment via upper house procedure. Impacts Future Democratic presidential candidates from the current Senate may suffer in primaries if they allow Gorsuch’s appointment. Gorsuch will help the White House and Congress severely cut back federal regulatory powers. Congressional Republicans are more likely to defy Trump on personnel and policy as his personal influence wanes ahead of the 2020 elections.

Law and Politics

2019 ◽  
pp. 785-882
Author(s):  
G. Edward White
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
The Political ◽  
Electoral Process ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Political Question

Bush v. Gore, when it was first decided, was widely criticized by commentators as an unjustifiable intervention by the Supreme Court into the Florida electoral process in the 2000 presidential election. Two decades later, the case seems much less significant, and arguably less controversial. The chapter traces the “journey” of the Supreme Court toward Bush v. Gore, which consisted of a combination of its abandoning the “political question” doctrine, which posited that the Court should avoid reviewing legislative decisions affecting the redistricting of voters in political elections, and the unique circumstances of the 2000 presidential election in Florida and Florida’s electoral processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document