2025/10/22 by Øyvind Stiansen · 1 voice
Social Sciences · #Criminal Law and Evidence #Judicial and Constitutional Studies #Legal Education and Practice Innovations
paper · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198888581.013.0008
openalex publication_date 2025/10/22 · openalex created_date 2025/10/23 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Abstract Courts frequently decide politically important cases in Norway. Yet, despite voicing concerns about the consequences of judicialization for representative democracy, scholars of Norwegian politics have, until recently, neglected judicial politics. In the past decade, this situation has changed: we now know much about how institutional changes have contributed to the Supreme Court’s increased policymaking role, how judicial decision-making is influenced by judges’ attitudes and backgrounds, and the (limited) degree to which Supreme Court appointments have been politicized. The view that judges merely apply law and should be considered outside politics has been replaced by an understanding that judges also make law and that their attitudes matter. However, even as scholars of Norwegian politics have discovered the judiciary’s political importance, they continue to pay little attention to questions concerning judicial power that animate much comparative scholarship. Future research should scrutinize the judiciary’s ability to shape policy when faced with political resistance.