THE INSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS OF SUPREME COURT POWER IN BRITAIN'S REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY

REFERENCES

• AITKEN, RUTH, HANNAH SMALLWOOD and LINDSAY STIRTON. 2011. Judicial politics: reigning supreme? New Law Journal 2011: 1671–3.
   Google Scholar
• ANDERSON, DAVID. 2004. The law lords and the European courts. In Building the UK's New Supreme Court: National and Comparative Perspectives, edited by A. Le Sueur. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 199–217.
   Google Scholar
• BAILEY, MICHAEL A. and FORREST MALTZMAN. 2011. The Constrained Court: Law, Politics, and the Decisions Justices Make. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• BELLAMY, RICHARD. 2011. Political constitutionalism and the Human Rights Act. International Journal of Constitutional Law 9 (1): 86–111. doi: 10.1093/icon/mor024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BERGARA, MARIO, BARAK RICHMAN and PABLO T. SPILLER. 2003. Modeling Supreme Court strategic decision-making: the congressional constraint. Legislative Studies Quarterly 28: 247–80. doi: 10.3162/036298003X200881
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BEVIR, MARK. 2008. The Westminster model, governance and judicial reform. Parliamentary Affairs 61 (4): 559–77. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsn025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BINGHAM, TOM. 2011. Lives of the Law: Selected Essays and Speeches 2000–2010. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• BOCHON, ANTHONY and FRANCES HOBDEN. 2011. Politics and the Supreme Court. Cambridge Student Law Review 7 (2): 33–7.
   Google Scholar
• BOGDANOR, VERNON. 2009. The New British Constitution. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• CARRUBBA, CLIFFORD J., MATTHEW GABEL and CHARLES HANKLA. 2008. Judicial behavior under political constraints: evidence from the European Court of Justice. American Political Science Review 102 (4): 435–52. doi: 10.1017/S0003055408080350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DIXIT, AVINASH K. 1996. The Making of Economic Policy: A Transaction-Cost Politics Perspective. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• DONALD, ALICE, JANE GORDON and PHILIP LEACH. 2012. The UK and the European Court of Human Rights (Equality and Human Rights Commission Research Report 83). Manchester: Equality and Human Rights Commission.
   Google Scholar
• DRAZEN, ALLAN. 2000. Political Economy in Macroeconomics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DREWRY, GAVIN. 2011. The UK Supreme Court – a fine new vintage, or just a smart new label on a dusty old bottle? International Journal for Court Administration 2011: 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• ELLIOTT, MARK and ROBERT THOMAS. 2011. Public Law. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• EPSTEIN, LEE and JACK KNIGHT. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington, DC: C.Q. Press.
   Google Scholar
• ESKRIDGE, WILLIAM N. 1991. Overriding Supreme Court statutory interpretation decisions. Yale Law Journal 101: 331–455. doi: 10.2307/796805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EWING, KEITH. 2009. Judiciary. In The Oxford Handbook of British Politics, edited by M. Flinders, A. Gamble, C. Hay and M. Kenny. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 262–82.
   Google Scholar
• FEREJOHN, JOHN. 1999. Independent judges, dependent judiciary: explaining judicial independence. Southern California Law Review 72: 353–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FLINDERS, MATTHEW and DION CURRY. 2008. Bi-constitutionality: unravelling New Labour's constitutional orientations. Parliamentary Affairs 61 (1): 99–121. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsm048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FRANCK, RAPHAEL. 2008. Judicial independence under a divided polity: a study of the rulings of the French Constitutional Court, 1959–2006. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 25 (1): 262–84. doi: 10.1093/jleo/ewn001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FRIEDMAN, BARRY. 2009. The Will of the People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced the Supreme Court and Shaped the Meaning of the Constitution. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• GARNETT, MARK. 2011. Supreme justice? The US and UK Supreme Courts. Political Insight 2: 26–8. doi: 10.1111/j.2041-9066.2011.00056.x
   Google Scholar
• GIBSON, JAMES L. and GREGORY A. CALDEIRA. 2009. Citizens, Courts and Confirmations: Positivity Theory and the Judgments of the American People. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• GINSBURG, TOM. 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• HALE, BRENDA. 2012. Argentoratum Locutum: is Strasbourg or the Supreme Court supreme? Human Rights Law Review 12 (1): 65–78.
   Google Scholar
• HYRE, JAMES. 2004. The United Kingdom's declaration of judicial independence: creating a Supreme Court to secure individual rights under the Human Rights Act of 1998. Fordham Law Review 73 (1): 423–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JACOBI, TONJA. 2006. The impact of positive political theory on old questions of constitutional law and the separation of powers. Northwestern University Law Review 100: 259–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JOHNSTON, ANGUS and EVA NAOPOULOS. 2010. The new UK Supreme Court, the separation of powers and anti-terrorism measures. Cambridge Law Journal 69 (2): 217–20. doi: 10.1017/S0008197310000322
   Google Scholar
• KAVANAGH, AILEEN. 2011. From Appellate Committee to UK Supreme Court: independence, activism and transparency. In From House of Lords to Supreme Court: Judges, Jurists and the Process of Judging, edited by J. Lee. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 35–55.
   Google Scholar
• KIRBY, MICHAEL. 2011. A Darwinian reflection on judicial values and appointments to final national courts. In From House of Lords to Supreme Court: Judges, Jurists and the Process of Judging, edited by J. Lee. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 9–34.
   Google Scholar
• LAFFONT, JEAN-JACQUES and DAVID MARTIMORT. 2002. The Theory of Incentives: The Principal-Agent Model. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• LAW, DAVID S. 2009. A theory of judicial power and judicial review. Georgetown Law Journal 97: 723–801.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LE SUEUR, ANDREW. 2004. The conception of the UK's new Supreme Court. In Building the UK's New Supreme Court: National and Comparative Perspectives, edited by A. Le Sueur. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–20.
   Google Scholar
• LE SUEUR, ANDREW. 2011. Administrative justice and the resolution of disputes. In The Changing Constitution (7th edn), edited by J. Jowell and D. Oliver. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 260–86.
   Google Scholar
• LEYLAND, PETER. 2012. The Constitution of the United Kingdom: A Contextual Analysis (2nd edn). Oxford: Hart Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• MALLESON, KATE. 2011. The evolving role of the Supreme Court. Public Law 2011: 754–72.
   Google Scholar
• MASTERMAN, ROGER. 2009. Labour's ‘juridification’ of the constitution. Parliamentary Affairs 62 (3): 476–92. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsp013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MAUTE, JUDITH L. 2007. English reforms to judicial selection: comparative lessons for American states? Fordham Urban Law Journal XXXIV: 387–423.
   Google Scholar
• MCADAMS, RICHARD. 2005. The expressive power of adjudication. University of Illinois Law Review 5: 1043–121.
   Google Scholar
• MCLEAN, IAIN. 2010. What's Wrong with the British Constitution? New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• MITTAL, SONIA and BARRY R. WEINGAST. 2010. Constitutional stability and the deferential court. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 13: 337–52.
   Google Scholar
• MOUSTAFA, TAMIR. 2007. The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law, Politics, and Economic Development in Egypt. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• NORTH, DOUGLASS C. and BARRY R. WEINGAST. 1989. Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. The Journal of Economic History 49: 803–32. doi: 10.1017/S0022050700009451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'BRIEN, PATRICK. 2011. Judicial independence and the UK Supreme Court. British Politics Review 6 (3): 5.
   Google Scholar
• PHILLIPS, NICHOLAS. 2011. Judicial independence and accountability: a view from the Supreme Court. Lecture delivered at the UCL Constitution Unit, launch of Research Project on The Politics of Judicial Independence, 8 February.
   Google Scholar
• PRINCE, SUE. 2004. The law and politics: upsetting the judicial apple-cart. Parliamentary Affairs 57 (2): 288–330. doi: 10.1093/pa/gsh025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RAMSEYER, J. MARK. 1994. The puzzling (in)dependence of courts: a comparative approach. Journal of Legal Studies 23: 721–47. doi: 10.1086/467943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RHODES, R. A. W., JOHN WANNA and PATRICK WELLER. 2009. Comparing Westminster. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• RODRIGUEZ-RAGA, JUAN CARLOS. 2011. Strategic deference in the Colombian Constitutional Court, 1992–2006. In Courts in Latin America, edited by G. Helmke and J. Rios-Figueroa. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 81–98.
   Google Scholar
• SHEPSLE, KENNETH A. 2010. Analyzing Politics: Rationality, Behavior, and Institutions (2nd edn). New York: W. W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• STEPHENSON, MATTHEW C. 2003. ‘When the devil turns…’: the political foundations of independent judicial review. Journal of Legal Studies 32: 59–89. doi: 10.1086/342038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• STEPHENSON, MATTHEW C. 2007. Judicial reform in developing countries: constraints and opportunities. In Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics: Beyond Transition, edited by Francois Bourguignon and Boris Pleskovic. Washington, DC: World Bank, pp. 311–28.
   Google Scholar
• TOMKINS, ADAM. 2009. Constitutionalism. In The Oxford Handbook of British Politics, edited by M. Flinders, A. Gamble, C. Hay and M. Kenny. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 239–61.
   Google Scholar
• TRACHTMAN, JOEL P. 2008. The Economic Structure of International Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• TURPIN, COLIN and ADAM TOMKINS. 2011. British Government and the Constitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• VERMEULE, ADRIAN. 2012. The atrophy of constitutional powers. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 32: 421–44. doi: 10.1093/ojls/gqs010
   Google Scholar
• ZORN, CHRISTOPHER. 2006. Institutions and independence in models of judicial review. In Institutional Games and the US Supreme Court, edited by J. R. Rogers, R. B. Fleming and J. R. Bond. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, pp. 43–68.
   Google Scholar