Courts that Matter: Activists, Judges, and the Politics of Rights Enforcement (Comparative Constitutional Law and Policy)

In Courts that Matter, Sandra Botero tackles a crucial question: Can courts advance socioeconomic rights? Using a rigorous comparative study of the impact of socioeconomic rights rulings in Colombia and Argentina, Botero argues that such decisions can be significantly impactful when courts deploy certain monitoring mechanisms and when legally empowered organizations in civil society are engaged in the outcome. The book includes case studies of landmark rulings on environmental, health, housing, and other socioeconomic rights and charts pathways for broader applicability through comparison with rulings by the Indian Supreme Court. The book demonstrates how Colombian and Argentine highest tribunals have, at times, successfully configured important new political spaces for the effective pursuit of public policy goals, in conjunction and dialogue with other social and political actors. This title is part of the Flip it Open Programme and may also be available Open Access. Check our website Cambridge Core for details. Cover Half-title Series information Title page Imprints page Contents List of Figures List of Tables Acknowledgments 1 Introduction 1.1 The Argument in Brief 1.2 Contributions 1.3 Plan Ahead 2 Coproducing Judicial Impact 2.1 Conceptualizing and Measuring Judicial Impact 2.2 Causation 2.3 Beyond Direct and Indirect Effects 2.4 Explaining Judicial Impact 2.5 The Argument 2.6 Research Strategy 3 Collaborative Oversight Arenas 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Environmental Rights: Causa Mendoza (Argentina) 3.3 Right to Health: T-760 (Colombia) 3.4 Alternative Explanations 3.5 Conclusions 4 Assessing the Effects of Monitoring Mechanisms and Legal Constituencies 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Cases with Dense Legal Constituencies and No Monitoring Mechanisms 4.3 Cases with Monitoring Mechanisms 4.4 Conclusions: The Four Cases in Comparative Perspective 5 Low Impact Cases 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Rights to Food and Health: Causa Chaco (Argentina) 5.3 Environmental Rights: T-231 (Colombia) 5.4 Conclusions: Learning from Chaco and T-231 6 Collaborative Monitoring in India 6.1 Right to Food Case 6.2 Delhi Vehicular Pollution Case 6.3 Conclusions 7 Conclusions 7.1 Can Courts Advance Rights? 7.2 Cross-Regional Lessons 7.3 Refinements to My Theory 7.4 Crafting Impact through Collaboration 7.5 Responding to the Critics of Judicial Intervention in SER 7.6 Judicial Power Appendices Appendix A: Methodological Considerations Appendix B: Key Supreme Court of India Orders on TPDS and Midday Meal References Index "Courts around the world regularly issue rulings on the socioeconomic rights of citizens, but the impact of these decisions varies widely. This book compares the experiences of two very assertive high courts in Colombia and Argentina to examine the differing impacts of landmark socioeconomic rights decisions"-- Provided by publisher