Essays on judicial behavior
Ano de defesa: | 2018 |
---|---|
Autor(a) principal: | |
Orientador(a): | , |
Banca de defesa: | |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
Idioma: | eng |
Instituição de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
País: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
Palavras-chave em Português: | |
Palavras-chave em Inglês: | |
Link de acesso: | http://hdl.handle.net/10438/24115 |
Resumo: | What do judges want? Although apparently a straightforward question, the motivations that underly judge’s decisions have been a persistent topic of debate in the literature. The discussion arises from the fact that judges, especially those in superior courts, are usually insulated from the ordinary incentives that other agents face. Most enjoy life tenure, their salaries cannot be decreased, and have no performance bonus. Hence, an assumption of economic self-interest would hardly provide useful insights into judicial preferences. In the three essays that form this thesis, I contribute to the judicial behavior literature by providing empirical evidence of at least three different vectors that govern judicial decision-making. In the first essay, I show that judges respond to transparency and scrutiny. The main idea is to explore how a shift in transparency – since 2002 the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) broadcasts its deliberations live on television – may alter behavior. Here, I employ a research design seldom used in the judicial behavior literature – Differences-in-Differences – to test how STF judges have responded to increased transparency. The main finding is that STF justices, when given free television time, act to maximize their individual exposure. They achieve that by writing longer votes and by engaging in more discussions with their peers. In the second essay, I show that political preferences matter. Here, in delving into the judicial activism literature, I test whether activism is related to politics in two ways. First, whether judges appointed by left-wing presidents are more (or less) likely to engage in activist voting than those appointed by right-wing presidents. Second, if judges appointed by presidents of either end of the political spectrum are sensitive to political context, that is, if they respond to the presence of their appointing party in the Executive. In doing so, I propose a new measure of judicial activism, which conditions votes to strike on the Prosecutor-General’s brief. The main result is that activism – both in the traditional and new measures – is associated with ideology measured by presidential appointment. Also, in the new measure, judges are sensitive to political context – they are less likely to engage in activist voting when their appointing party is incumbent in the Federal Executive. Lastly, career matters. Justices that are former politicians are less likely to be activist. Finally, in the third essay, I investigate the determinants of judicial dissent in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Particularly, I disentangle two features of judicial behavior that are known to affect the decision to dissent: ideological heterogeneity and dissent aversion. To do so, I explore the fact that voting in this Court is sequential, that there is a predetermined voting order that varies in nearly every case, to identify where dissent aversion will manifest. The main point is that after a majority has been formed, the justices who vote in sequence know that their votes cannot change the outcome of the case. Hence, they may deviate from their preferred votes and join the majority to avoid the costs of dissenting. Here, I find strong evidence of dissent aversion in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Judges who vote after the pivotal judge are significantly less likely to dissent. The evidence for ideology, however, does not survive all robustness checks. |
id |
FGV_ef1364ea5f2e8c822f8b516d0767c20b |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/24115 |
network_acronym_str |
FGV |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Lopes, Felipe de MendonçaEscolas::EESPMueller, BernardoFerman, BrunoGaroupa, NunoPonczek, Vladimir PinheiroSoares, Rodrigo ReisAzevedo, Paulo Furquim de2018-06-15T18:36:10Z2018-06-15T18:36:10Z2018-05-28http://hdl.handle.net/10438/24115What do judges want? Although apparently a straightforward question, the motivations that underly judge’s decisions have been a persistent topic of debate in the literature. The discussion arises from the fact that judges, especially those in superior courts, are usually insulated from the ordinary incentives that other agents face. Most enjoy life tenure, their salaries cannot be decreased, and have no performance bonus. Hence, an assumption of economic self-interest would hardly provide useful insights into judicial preferences. In the three essays that form this thesis, I contribute to the judicial behavior literature by providing empirical evidence of at least three different vectors that govern judicial decision-making. In the first essay, I show that judges respond to transparency and scrutiny. The main idea is to explore how a shift in transparency – since 2002 the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) broadcasts its deliberations live on television – may alter behavior. Here, I employ a research design seldom used in the judicial behavior literature – Differences-in-Differences – to test how STF judges have responded to increased transparency. The main finding is that STF justices, when given free television time, act to maximize their individual exposure. They achieve that by writing longer votes and by engaging in more discussions with their peers. In the second essay, I show that political preferences matter. Here, in delving into the judicial activism literature, I test whether activism is related to politics in two ways. First, whether judges appointed by left-wing presidents are more (or less) likely to engage in activist voting than those appointed by right-wing presidents. Second, if judges appointed by presidents of either end of the political spectrum are sensitive to political context, that is, if they respond to the presence of their appointing party in the Executive. In doing so, I propose a new measure of judicial activism, which conditions votes to strike on the Prosecutor-General’s brief. The main result is that activism – both in the traditional and new measures – is associated with ideology measured by presidential appointment. Also, in the new measure, judges are sensitive to political context – they are less likely to engage in activist voting when their appointing party is incumbent in the Federal Executive. Lastly, career matters. Justices that are former politicians are less likely to be activist. Finally, in the third essay, I investigate the determinants of judicial dissent in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Particularly, I disentangle two features of judicial behavior that are known to affect the decision to dissent: ideological heterogeneity and dissent aversion. To do so, I explore the fact that voting in this Court is sequential, that there is a predetermined voting order that varies in nearly every case, to identify where dissent aversion will manifest. The main point is that after a majority has been formed, the justices who vote in sequence know that their votes cannot change the outcome of the case. Hence, they may deviate from their preferred votes and join the majority to avoid the costs of dissenting. Here, I find strong evidence of dissent aversion in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Judges who vote after the pivotal judge are significantly less likely to dissent. The evidence for ideology, however, does not survive all robustness checks.O que os juízes querem? Embora uma pergunta aparentemente simples, as motivações subjacentes às decisões dos juízes têm sido um tópico persistente de debate na literatura. A discussão surge do fato de que os juízes, especialmente aqueles em cortes superiores, normalmente são isolados dos incentivos que outros agentes enfrentam. A maioria tem cargo vitalício, seus salários não podem ser reduzidos e não têm bônus por desempenho. Desta forma, uma suposição de auto interesse econômico dificilmente forneceria conclusões úteis sobre preferências judiciais. Nos três ensaios que formam esta tese, eu contribuo para a literatura de comportamento judicial, fornecendo evidências empíricas de ao menos três vetores diferentes que regem a tomada de decisões por juízes. No primeiro ensaio, mostro que os juízes respondem à transparência e ao escrutínio. A ideia principal é explorar como uma mudança na transparência - desde 2002, o Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) transmite suas deliberações ao vivo pela televisão - pode alterar o comportamento. Neste trabalho, emprego um método raramente utilizado na literatura de comportamento judicial - Diferenças-em-Diferenças - para testar como juízes do STF respondem a uma maior transparência. A principal conclusão é que ministros do STF agem para maximizar sua exposição individual quando lhes é dado tempo gratuito de televisão. Para isso, escrevem votos mais longos e interagem mais frequentemente com seus pares. No segundo ensaio, mostro que preferências políticas são relevantes. Aqui, ao investigar a literatura do ativismo judicial, testo se o ativismo está correlacionado com preferências políticas de duas maneiras. Primeiro, se juízes nomeados por presidentes de esquerda são mais (ou menos) propensos a votar de modo ativista do que aqueles nomeados por presidentes de direita. Segundo, se juízes indicados por presidentes de ambos os extremos do espectro político são sensíveis ao contexto político, isto é, se respondem à presença, no Executivo, do partido que os indicou. Aqui, proponho uma nova medida de ativismo judicial, que condiciona votos pela inconstitucionalidade das leis ao parecer do Procurador Geral da República. O principal resultado é que ativismo - tanto na medida tradicional quanto na nova que proponho - é associado à ideologia política medida pela indicação presidencial. Além disso, na nova medida, juízes são sensíveis ao contexto político - são menos propensos a votar de modo ativista se o incumbente no Executivo Federal foi o responsável por sua indicação à corte. Por fim, a carreira anterior também é importante. Juízes que foram políticos são menos propensos a serem ativistas. Finalmente, no terceiro ensaio, investigo os determinantes da divergência judicial no STF. Em particular, distingo duas características do comportamento dos juízes que reconhecidamente afetam a decisão de divergir: heterogeneidade ideológica e aversão à divergência. Com este objetivo, exploro o fato de que a votação nesta Corte é sequencial, ou seja, que há uma ordem de votação pré-estabelecida que varia em quase todos os casos, para identificar onde a aversão à divergência deve se manifestar. O ponto principal é que depois que a maioria foi formada, os juízes que votam na sequência sabem que seus votos não mudarão o resultado do caso. Logo, eles podem se desviar de seus votos preferidos e se unir à maioria para evitar os custos de divergir. Aqui, encontro fortes evidências de aversão à divergência no Supremo Tribunal Federal. Juízes que votam após o juiz pivotal são significativamente menos propensos a divergir. Evidências a favor da heterogeneidade ideológica, no entanto, não sobrevivem aos testes de robustez.engBrazilian Supreme CourtJudicial behaviorJudicial politicsJudicial activismDissent aversionSupremo Tribunal FederalComportamento judicialPolítica judicialAtivismo judicialAversão à divergênciaEconomiaBrasil. Supremo Tribunal FederalPareceres jurídicosJuízes - CondutaPoder judiciário e questões políticasEssays on judicial behaviorinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital)instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVTEXTTese_Final.pdf.txtTese_Final.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain100669https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/926686b5-7db3-40f9-a162-06dd97da85f4/download3bc011552ed4170d7f52be7ac60bb76cMD55ORIGINALTese_Final.pdfTese_Final.pdfPDFapplication/pdf1919518https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/11b36219-280f-4ad2-9c10-b40503119afc/download7268ca7969cd2221eddc7a1b4919fee6MD51LICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-84707https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/ba8c0211-4f5e-4315-babb-68927131156d/downloaddfb340242cced38a6cca06c627998fa1MD52THUMBNAILTese_Final.pdf.jpgTese_Final.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg2293https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/dd8fa5a7-8ffb-4aec-9752-290dc6851769/download8d65b762e6be34f7d5c05bc77d352780MD5610438/241152023-11-26 19:55:34.132open.accessoai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/24115https://repositorio.fgv.brRepositório InstitucionalPRIhttp://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace-oai/requestopendoar:39742023-11-26T19:55:34Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)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 |
dc.title.eng.fl_str_mv |
Essays on judicial behavior |
title |
Essays on judicial behavior |
spellingShingle |
Essays on judicial behavior Lopes, Felipe de Mendonça Brazilian Supreme Court Judicial behavior Judicial politics Judicial activism Dissent aversion Supremo Tribunal Federal Comportamento judicial Política judicial Ativismo judicial Aversão à divergência Economia Brasil. Supremo Tribunal Federal Pareceres jurídicos Juízes - Conduta Poder judiciário e questões políticas |
title_short |
Essays on judicial behavior |
title_full |
Essays on judicial behavior |
title_fullStr |
Essays on judicial behavior |
title_full_unstemmed |
Essays on judicial behavior |
title_sort |
Essays on judicial behavior |
author |
Lopes, Felipe de Mendonça |
author_facet |
Lopes, Felipe de Mendonça |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.unidadefgv.por.fl_str_mv |
Escolas::EESP |
dc.contributor.member.none.fl_str_mv |
Mueller, Bernardo Ferman, Bruno Garoupa, Nuno Ponczek, Vladimir Pinheiro |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Lopes, Felipe de Mendonça |
dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv |
Soares, Rodrigo Reis Azevedo, Paulo Furquim de |
contributor_str_mv |
Soares, Rodrigo Reis Azevedo, Paulo Furquim de |
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian Supreme Court Judicial behavior Judicial politics Judicial activism Dissent aversion |
topic |
Brazilian Supreme Court Judicial behavior Judicial politics Judicial activism Dissent aversion Supremo Tribunal Federal Comportamento judicial Política judicial Ativismo judicial Aversão à divergência Economia Brasil. Supremo Tribunal Federal Pareceres jurídicos Juízes - Conduta Poder judiciário e questões políticas |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Supremo Tribunal Federal Comportamento judicial Política judicial Ativismo judicial Aversão à divergência |
dc.subject.area.por.fl_str_mv |
Economia |
dc.subject.bibliodata.por.fl_str_mv |
Brasil. Supremo Tribunal Federal Pareceres jurídicos Juízes - Conduta Poder judiciário e questões políticas |
description |
What do judges want? Although apparently a straightforward question, the motivations that underly judge’s decisions have been a persistent topic of debate in the literature. The discussion arises from the fact that judges, especially those in superior courts, are usually insulated from the ordinary incentives that other agents face. Most enjoy life tenure, their salaries cannot be decreased, and have no performance bonus. Hence, an assumption of economic self-interest would hardly provide useful insights into judicial preferences. In the three essays that form this thesis, I contribute to the judicial behavior literature by providing empirical evidence of at least three different vectors that govern judicial decision-making. In the first essay, I show that judges respond to transparency and scrutiny. The main idea is to explore how a shift in transparency – since 2002 the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) broadcasts its deliberations live on television – may alter behavior. Here, I employ a research design seldom used in the judicial behavior literature – Differences-in-Differences – to test how STF judges have responded to increased transparency. The main finding is that STF justices, when given free television time, act to maximize their individual exposure. They achieve that by writing longer votes and by engaging in more discussions with their peers. In the second essay, I show that political preferences matter. Here, in delving into the judicial activism literature, I test whether activism is related to politics in two ways. First, whether judges appointed by left-wing presidents are more (or less) likely to engage in activist voting than those appointed by right-wing presidents. Second, if judges appointed by presidents of either end of the political spectrum are sensitive to political context, that is, if they respond to the presence of their appointing party in the Executive. In doing so, I propose a new measure of judicial activism, which conditions votes to strike on the Prosecutor-General’s brief. The main result is that activism – both in the traditional and new measures – is associated with ideology measured by presidential appointment. Also, in the new measure, judges are sensitive to political context – they are less likely to engage in activist voting when their appointing party is incumbent in the Federal Executive. Lastly, career matters. Justices that are former politicians are less likely to be activist. Finally, in the third essay, I investigate the determinants of judicial dissent in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Particularly, I disentangle two features of judicial behavior that are known to affect the decision to dissent: ideological heterogeneity and dissent aversion. To do so, I explore the fact that voting in this Court is sequential, that there is a predetermined voting order that varies in nearly every case, to identify where dissent aversion will manifest. The main point is that after a majority has been formed, the justices who vote in sequence know that their votes cannot change the outcome of the case. Hence, they may deviate from their preferred votes and join the majority to avoid the costs of dissenting. Here, I find strong evidence of dissent aversion in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Judges who vote after the pivotal judge are significantly less likely to dissent. The evidence for ideology, however, does not survive all robustness checks. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2018-06-15T18:36:10Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2018-06-15T18:36:10Z |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2018-05-28 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10438/24115 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10438/24115 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) instacron:FGV |
instname_str |
Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
instacron_str |
FGV |
institution |
FGV |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) |
collection |
Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/926686b5-7db3-40f9-a162-06dd97da85f4/download https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/11b36219-280f-4ad2-9c10-b40503119afc/download https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/ba8c0211-4f5e-4315-babb-68927131156d/download https://repositorio.fgv.br/bitstreams/dd8fa5a7-8ffb-4aec-9752-290dc6851769/download |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
3bc011552ed4170d7f52be7ac60bb76c 7268ca7969cd2221eddc7a1b4919fee6 dfb340242cced38a6cca06c627998fa1 8d65b762e6be34f7d5c05bc77d352780 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional do FGV (FGV Repositório Digital) - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1810024508993568768 |