Sovereignty, Substance, and Public Support for European Courts' Human Rights Rulings

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Identifiers
Publication date
2021-11-05
Defense date
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Cambridge
Impact
Google Scholar
Export
Abstract
Is the public backlash against human rights rulings from European courts driven by substantive concerns over case outcomes, procedural concerns over sovereignty, or combinations thereof? We conducted preregistered survey experiments in Denmark, France, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom using three vignettes: a foreigner who faces extradition, a person fighting a fine for burning Qurans, and a home owner contesting eviction. Each vignette varies with respect to whether a European court disagrees with a national court (deference treatment) and whether an applicant wins a case (outcome treatment). We find little evidence that deference moves willingness to implement judgments or acceptance of court authority but ample evidence that case outcomes matter. Even nationalists and authoritarians are unmoved by European court decisions as long as they agree with the case outcome. These findings imply that nationalist opposition to European courts is more about content than the location of authority and that backlash to domestic and international courts may be driven by similar forces.
Description
Keywords
Research Projects
Bibliographic citation
Madsen, M. R., Mayoral, J. A., Strezhnev, A., & Voeten, E. (2021). Sovereignty, Substance, and Public Support for European Courts’ Human Rights Rulings. American Political Science Review, 116 (2), pp. 419-438.