Appendix - Balancing Language

Online-Appendix and Replication Data for the paper: Balancing as a mean of judicial activism? Analysis of the German Federal Constitutional Court's use of balancing language Forthcoming: German Law Journal Abstract: Many constitutional courts use balancing in constitutional right adjudication. However, critics argue that balancing is an (self-)empowerment of the courts and a tool of judicial activism. It is claimed that constitutional courts are increasingly using this technique when ruling against the legislature, e.g. when striking down laws. This study empirically examines the status of balancing in the case law of the German Federal Constitutional Court. It demonstrates that text-as-data methods can be used to analyze judicial reasoning by using word embeddings to measure the use of balancing language. It is shown that the use of balancing language increased during the first 50 years of the court's existence. Since then, there has been a decline. The court also tends not to use more balancing language in decisions overturning laws. This evidence challenges the critique's assumption that balancing is a tool of judicial activism. The main dataset for the analysis and the R code with the key model for replication can be found here (replication.zip) in addition to the online appendix. Version 2 of this repository (which fixes a small bug in version 1) contains the files of the final publication. Please feel free to contact me for the full code and data: [e-mail] This research has been realized in the L.L.Con project graciously funded in the years 2017-2024 by means of the Gottfried-Wilhelm Leibniz prize awarded to Prof. Dr. Christoph Möllers https://www.lehrstuhl-moellers.de/llcon本论文的在线附录与复现数据集： 《作为司法能动主义手段的利益衡量？德国联邦宪法法院利益衡量话语使用分析》 即将发表于：《德国法律期刊（German Law Journal）》 摘要： 许多宪法法院在宪法权利裁判中运用利益衡量（balancing）。但批评者认为，利益衡量是法院的（自我）赋权手段，亦是司法能动主义（judicial activism）的工具。有观点主张，宪法法院在作出与立法机关相悖的裁判（例如裁定法律无效）时，愈发频繁地使用该方法。本研究以实证方式考察了德国联邦宪法法院（German Federal Constitutional Court）判例中利益衡量的应用现状。研究表明，可借助词嵌入（word embeddings）技术量化利益衡量话语的使用频次，以此通过文本-as-数据（text-as-data）方法分析司法推理过程。研究发现，在该法院成立的前50年间，利益衡量话语的使用频次呈上升趋势，此后则有所回落。此外，法院在裁定法律无效的裁判中，并未倾向于更多使用利益衡量话语。该实证结果对“利益衡量是司法能动主义工具”这一批判性假设构成了挑战。 本研究分析所用的核心数据集、用于复现分析的关键模型R语言代码（R code），可与在线附录一同通过（replication.zip）获取。 本仓库的第二版（修复了第一版中的一处微小漏洞）包含最终发表版的相关文件。 如需获取完整代码与数据集，请联系：[e-mail] 本研究依托L.L.Con项目完成，该项目由克里斯托夫·默勒斯教授（Prof. Dr. Christoph Möllers）凭借戈特弗里德·威廉·莱布尼茨奖（Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize）于2017至2024年间资助。 项目网址：https://www.lehrstuhl-moellers.de/llcon