The Shadow Effect of Courts: Judicial Review and the Politics of Preemptive Reform

We challenge the prevalent claim that courts can only influence policy by adjudicating disputes. Instead, we theorize shadow effect of : makers preemptively altering policies in anticipation possible judicial review. While American studies imply preemptive reforms hinge on litigious interest groups pressuring who support review, advance a comparative theory flips these presumptions. In less and more hostile political contexts, may instead weaponize to preclude bureaucratic conflicts from triggering oversight starve cases they need build their authority. By allowing some resist direct interference, recalcitrant demonstrate effects are not an unqualified good for courts. illustrate our tracing how major welfare reform Norway was triggered conflict within its Ministry Labor government resistance campaign targeting little-known international court.