Publication

Back to overview

When Issue Salience Affects Adjudication: Evidence from Swiss Asylum Appeal Decisions

Type of publication Peer-reviewed
Publikationsform Original article (peer-reviewed)
Author Spirig Judith,
Project Like Cases Alike or Asylum Lottery? Judicial Preference Variation on the Swiss Federal Administrative Court, 2007-2015
Show all

Original article (peer-reviewed)

Journal American Journal of Political Science
Page(s) ajps.12612 - ajps.12612
Title of proceedings American Journal of Political Science
DOI 10.1111/ajps.12612

Open Access

URL http://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12612
Type of Open Access Publisher (Gold Open Access)

Abstract

Immigration is a top concern among citizens across the globe. Research shows that the salience of immigration shapes voters' political behavior, but little is known about whether it influences judicial behavior. This article theorizes that variation in issue salience influences judges' behavior when there is a clear connection between the legal and a generally salient, politicized issue. I test this argument drawing on all Swiss asylum appeal decisions reached between 2007 and 2015. I find that higher asylum salience leads judges to decide otherwise similar asylum appeals less favorably. This effect is not restricted to judges affiliated with anti-immigrant parties, unlikely to be driven by accountability pressures, and strongest for those topics known to drive anti-immigrant sentiment in the general public. Together, these findings raise concerns that issue salience threatens the consistency of judicial decisions.
-