BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 METHOD:PUBLISH PRODID:-//Telerik Inc.//Sitefinity CMS 15.1//EN BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Eastern Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:20251102T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=1SU;BYHOUR=2;BYMINUTE=0;BYMONTH=11 TZNAME:Eastern Standard Time TZOFFSETFROM:-0400 TZOFFSETTO:-0500 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:20250301T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYDAY=2SU;BYHOUR=2;BYMINUTE=0;BYMONTH=3 TZNAME:Eastern Daylight Time TZOFFSETFROM:-0500 TZOFFSETTO:-0400 END:DAYLIGHT END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT DESCRIPTION:The Moynihan Institute’s South Asia Center presents \;Steph an Stohler\, associate professor of political science.Free press protectio ns are fundamental to constitutional democracy\, yet their enforcement var ies when judges themselves face media scrutiny. \;Drawing on 658 decis ions from nine democratic countries and the European Court of Human Rights \, Stohler and co-author Matthew Ingram (SUNY Albany) show that judges are significantly less likely to uphold press rights when coverage targets th e judiciary rather than elected officials or bureaucrats. \;This patte rn persists across different constitutional systems and legal traditions\, even after accounting for legal doctrine\, coverage tone\, and institutio nal strength.Using regression analysis\, sentiment scoring\, and qualitati ve case studies\, we demonstrate that judges often invoke distinct justifi cations when limiting press freedoms. By examining judicial decision-makin g through the lens of institutional self-interest\, this article contribut es to scholarship on judicial behavior\, comparative constitutional law\, and freedom of expression. Our findings reveal a fundamental limitation in constitutional governance: rights enforcement weakens when judges face ac countability pressures. These dynamics raise serious questions about wheth er judges can reliably protect critical oversight as democracies worldwide increasingly entrust unelected judges with decisions that shape citizens' lives.Stephan Stohler is an associate professor of political science at S yracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. He holds a Ph.D. and J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. His research f ocuses on law and courts. He is the author of \;Reconstructing Rights: Courts\, Parties\, and Equality Rights in India\, South Africa\, and the United States. He is currently writing a book about the internet and the F irst Amendment. DTEND:20260331T180000Z DTSTAMP:20260510T233622Z DTSTART:20260331T163000Z LOCATION: SEQUENCE:0 SUMMARY:The Effect of Judges' Institutional Interests on a Free Press: Sout h Asia\, Europe\, and the Americas UID:RFCALITEM639140385829612050 X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:

The Moynihan Institute’s South Asia Center presents \;Stephan Stohler\, associate professor of political science.

Free press protections are fundamental to constitutional democracy\ , yet their enforcement varies when judges themselves face media scrutiny.  \;Drawing on 658 decisions from nine democratic countries and the Eur opean Court of Human Rights\, Stohler and co-author Matthew Ingram (SUNY A lbany) show that judges are significantly less likely to uphold press righ ts when coverage targets the judiciary rather than elected officials or bu reaucrats. \;This pattern persists across different constitutiona l systems and legal traditions\, even after accounting for legal doctrine\ , coverage tone\, and institutional strength.

Using regr ession analysis\, sentiment scoring\, and qualitative case studies\, we de monstrate that judges often invoke distinct justifications when limiting p ress freedoms. By examining judicial decision-making through the lens of i nstitutional self-interest\, this article contributes to scholarship on ju dicial behavior\, comparative constitutional law\, and freedom of expressi on. Our findings reveal a fundamental limitation in constituti onal governance: rights enforcement weakens when judges face accountabilit y pressures. These dynamics raise serious questions about whether judges c an reliably protect critical oversight as democracies worldwide increasing ly entrust unelected judges with decisions that shape citizens' lives.

Stephan Stohler is an associate professor of po litical science at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. He holds a Ph.D. and J.D. from the University of Pennsylv ania. His research focuses on law and courts. He is the author of \;Reconstructing Rights: Courts\, Parties\, and Equality Rights in India\, South Africa\, and the United States. He is currently writing a book about the internet and the First Amendment.

END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR