Anti-minority votes and judicial review

Abstract

The question of whether popular votes on minority rights are compatible with a liberal democracy has been broadly debated, with judicial review of popular initiatives having been discussed as a necessary veto point (Eule, Miller). As an institutional change should generally be congruent with voters’ preferences, this article asks who supports the restriction of direct democracy by judicial review and how this is related to voting behavior concerning anti-civil-rights initiatives. Two recent anti-minority votes in California and Switzerland provide examples in terms of voters’ attitudes towards judicial review of direct democracy. Cross-tables and logistic regressions of survey data show that a surprisingly broad majority of voters support judicial review of popular initiatives in both cases. Nevertheless, judicial review is not entirely uncontroversial. In Switzerland, opposition to judicial review can even predict anti-minority votes, and for specific judicial decisions, Californians also tend to blame judges for restricting the people’s sovereignty.