Mixed Judicial Selection and Constitutional Review

Abstract

Almost half the constitutional court judges worldwide are selected by a mixed selection system, whereby a specific number of judges are selected by different government institutions. What are the implications of this selection method and its variations for judges’ individual choices on constitutional review cases? An examination of vote choice on the Chilean and Colombian constitutional courts indicates that judges’ decisions to strike down laws are explained more by their and other colleagues’ institutional selector than their political party associations. The results call into question traditional judicial behavior models by suggesting that judges with different selectors have distinct voices when adjudicating constitutional questions which in turn enhances the deliberative process. However, the results also raise concern that certain selecting institutions may have a more significant voice in vetoing legislation than afforded them in the regular legislative process.