{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020253164556962026, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.591666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Judicial review and social construction: the case of the Turkish Constitutional Court

The Turkish Constitutional Court is often described as an agent of the raison d’etat. Although a number of judgements confirm this assessment, by shifting the focus from result to process the article reveals that judicial decision-making processes in the Turkish Court are more than often contestatory and determined by slim majorities. Modelling judicial decision-making as a process of competitive social construction, the article analyses judgements on constitutionality of surname laws vis-a-vis women. The findings demonstrate that though the ultimate judicial ruling may be tainted by extra-judicial considerations, tight votes signal that today’s dissenters can easily become tomorrow’s majority.