Delaney, Dixon & Kosař (2025), “Chief Justices and Democratic Resilience: Judicial Leadership in Times of Constitutional Crisis”

Chief justices play a pivotal role in safeguarding judicial legitimacy and democratic resilience, especially during periods of constitutional crisis. The authors argue that judicial legitimacy depends on a dynamic interplay of independence, accountability, and sociological acceptance. In hybrid or backsliding regimes, this balance becomes fragile, as courts face political attacks, jurisdiction stripping, and efforts to co-opt judicial leadership. The article introduces a tripartite framework of judicial leadership: jurisprudential power (agenda-setting, opinion shaping, and strategic silence), administrative power (managing the judiciary’s internal hierarchy, appointments, discipline, and budgets), and representational power (acting as the public face of the judiciary domestically and internationally). Because chief justices embody these powers in a single, identifiable figure, they become focal points for both resistance to and facilitation of democratic erosion. The authors emphasize that leadership capacity depends not only on formal powers but also on personal qualities, appointment pathways, institutional support structures, and historical context. Through comparative references to India, Israel, South Africa, Mexico, Kenya, Central Europe, and Hong Kong, the article highlights how chief justices can draw on internal alliances or transnational judicial networks to defend courts—but may also be captured and weaponized against democracy. Ultimately, the authors caution that autonomy and legitimacy are insufficient if courts lose authority over the democratic core: a judiciary that avoids confrontation or cedes jurisdiction can accelerate democratic decay, even without overt capture.