Comparative constitutional reasoning
by Itzcovich, Giulio, Jakab, András, Dyèvre, Arthur
"A large-scale comparative work of leading cases examines judicial constitutional reasoning in eighteen different legal systems globally."--Résumé de l'éditeur.
Comparative constitutional reasoning
Comparative constitutional reasoning
To what extent is the language of judicial opinions responsive to the political and social context in which constitutional courts operate? Courts are reason-giving institutions, with argumentation playing a central role in constitutional adjudication. However, a cursory look at …
Comparative constitutional reasoning
A large-scale comparative work of leading cases examines judicial constitutional reasoning in eighteen different legal systems globally.
Can courts really build democracy in a state emerging from authoritarian rule? This book presents a searching critique of the contemporary global model of democracy-building for post-authoritarian states, arguing that it places excessive reliance on courts. Since 1945, both cons…
"Can courts really build democracy in a state emerging from authoritarian rule? This book presents a searching critique of the contemporary global model of democracy-building for post-authoritarian states, arguing that it places excessive reliance on courts. Since 1945, both con…
This book presents a searching critique of excessive reliance on courts as 'democracy-builders' in states emerging from authoritarian rule.
It is often argued that courts are better suited for impartial deliberation than partisan legislatures, and that this capacity justifies handling them substantial powers of judicial review. This title provides a thorough analysis of those claims, introducing the theory of delibe…
It is often argued that courts are better suited for impartial deliberation than partisan legislatures, and that this capacity justifies handling them substantial powers of judicial review. This title provides a thorough analysis of those claims, introducing the theory of delibe…
It is often argued that courts are better suited for impartial deliberation than partisan legislatures, and that this capacity justifies handling them substantial powers of judicial review. This title provides a thorough analysis of those claims, introducing the theory of delibe…
It is often argued that courts are better suited for impartial deliberation than partisan legislatures, and that this capacity justifies handling them substantial powers of judicial review. This title provides a thorough analysis of those claims, introducing the theory of delibe…