The use of veto points to block policy change has received significant attention in Latin America, but the different institutional venues have not been analyzed in a unified framework. Uruguay is exceptional in that political actors use both referendums and judicial review as effective ways to oppose public policies. While the activation of direct democracy mechanisms in Uruguay has been widely studied, the surge in the use of the judicial venue remains underexplored. This article argues that veto point use responds to the ideological content of policies adopted by different coalitions and the type of interest organization affected. It shows that policy opponents predominantly activate referendums when center-right coalitions rule and judicial review when center-left coalitions govern. It illustrates the causal argument by tracing the politics of court and referendum activation. This approach helps to bridge the gap between research on direct democracy and judicial politics, providing a unified framework.

中文翻译：

---

从第二好的否决点到第一好的否决点：解释乌拉圭司法审查和公民投票的变化用途

使用否决权来阻止政策变化在拉丁美洲受到了极大的关注，但不同的制度场所尚未在统一的框架中进行分析。乌拉圭的特殊之处在于，政治参与者将公投和司法审查作为反对公共政策的有效方式。虽然乌拉圭直接民主机制的激活已得到广泛研究，但司法场所的使用激增仍未得到充分探索。本文认为，否决权的使用与不同联盟所采取的政策的意识形态内容以及受影响的利益组织类型有关。它表明政策反对者主要在中右翼联盟执政时启动全民投票，而在中左翼联盟执政时主要启动司法审查。它通过追踪法院和公民投票激活的政治来说明因果论证。这种方法有助于弥合直接民主和司法政治研究之间的差距，提供一个统一的框架。