Replication Data for: CompLaw: A Coding Protocol and Database for the Comparative Study of Judicial Review

A growing theoretical literature identifies how the process of constitutional review shapes judicial decision-making, legislative behavior, and even the constitutionality of legislation and executive actions. However, the empirical interrogation of these theoretical arguments is limited by the absence of a common protocol for coding constitutional review decisions across courts and time. We introduce such a coding protocol and database (CompLaw) of rulings by 42 constitutional courts. To illustrate the value of CompLaw, we examine a heretofore untested empirical implication about how review timing relates to rulings of unconstitutionality \citep{wardGabel2019}. First, we conduct a nuanced analysis of rulings by the French Constitutional Council over a 13-year period. We then examine the relationship between review timing and strike rates with a set of national constitutional courts in one year. Our data analysis highlights the benefits and flexibility of the CompLaw coding protocol for scholars of judicial review.

日益丰富的理论研究文献阐明了合宪性审查（constitutional review）程序如何塑造司法决策、立法行为，乃至立法与行政行为的合宪性。然而，针对这些理论主张的实证检验受制于缺乏一套通用的编码规程（coding protocol），可用于跨法院、跨时间节点对合宪性审查决策进行编码。为此，我们提出了这套编码规程，并构建了覆盖42家宪法法院裁决的数据库（CompLaw）。为展示CompLaw的应用价值，我们检验了一项此前未得到验证的实证推论——审查时机与违宪裁决之间的关联[Ward & Gabel, 2019]。首先，我们针对法国宪法委员会13年间的裁决展开了精细化分析。随后，我们针对单一年度内的多所国家宪法法院，分析了审查时机与违宪裁决率之间的关联。本次数据分析凸显了这套编码规程对于司法审查研究学者的优势与灵活性。