A Survivalist Theory of Judicial Manipulation in Latin America
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2022
Most theories of judicial politics are built around explaining the puzzle of judicial independence. This article instead theorizes explicitly about the conditions under which politicians are prone to manipulate their courts. By positing that courts can partly endogenously shape leaders’ fate at the hands of legislative opponents, we argue that greater political insecurity leads presidents to gut judicial independence, not shore it up. Drawing on a novel data set of judicial crises across 18 Latin American countries following the third wave of democratization, we show that variation in judicial crises is systematically correlated with the president’s risk of nonelectoral instability as captured by the history of past presidential crises, presidential power, and antigovernmental protests. To identify whether the effects of protest on judicial manipulation are causal, we use an instrumental variable approach based on international commodity prices weighted for each country.
An earlier version of this article was presented at the conference “Defending Human Rights in Times of Constitutional Crises” held in May 2018 at the University of Chicago, where participants provided invaluable feedback. We are also extremely grateful for comments from three anonymous reviewers. Replication materials are available in the JLC Dataverse at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/jlc.