In Courts that Matter, Sandra Botero tackles a crucial question: Can courts advance socioeconomic rights? Using a rigorous comparative study of the impact of socioeconomic rights rulings in Colombia and Argentina, Botero argues that such decisions can be significantly impactful when courts deploy certain monitoring mechanisms and when legally empowered organizations in civil society are engaged in the outcome. The book includes case studies of landmark rulings on environmental, health, housing, and other socioeconomic rights and charts pathways for broader applicability through comparison with rulings by the Indian Supreme Court. The book demonstrates how Colombian and Argentine highest tribunals have, at times, successfully configured important new political spaces for the effective pursuit of public policy goals, in conjunction and dialogue with other social and political actors. This title is part of the Flip it Open Programme and may also be available Open Access. Check our website Cambridge Core for details.

Latin America was one of the earliest and most enthusiastic adopters of what has come to be known as the judicialization of politics - the use of law and legal institutions as tools of social contestation to curb the abuse of power in government, resolve policy disputes, and enforce and expand civil, political, and socio-economic rights. Almost forty years into this experiment, The Limits of Judicialization brings together a cross-disciplinary group of scholars to assess the role that law and courts play in Latin American politics. Featuring studies of hot-button topics including abortion, state violence, judicial corruption, and corruption prosecutions, this volume argues that the institutional and cultural changes that empowered courts, what the editors call the 'judicialization superstructure,' often fall short of the promise of greater accountability and rights protection. Illustrative and expansive, this volume offers a truly interdisciplinary analysis of the limits of judicialized politics.