scispace - formally typeset
Journal Article•DOI•

A Primeira República Brasileira e o Supremo Tribunal Federal: aprender com o passado para não errar no presente e melhorar no futuro

Cícero José Barbosa Nery Júnior1•
Universidade São Judas Tadeu1
25 Aug 2021-Vol. 6, Iss: 2, pp 1-23

TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyze the role of the Supreme Federal Court in the Brazilian Republic and compare the actions of the court in both the First and Sixth Republics of Brazil.

Abstract: The proactive performance of the Supreme Federal Court has raised criticism and fears over the past few years. It is feared a disharmony between the Powers. However, the answer to this fear would not be an excessive limitation in their performance. For this reason, the present work will analyze the constitutional role of the Judiciary Power in the inauguration of the Brazilian Republic, more specifically its top organ, the Supreme Federal Court. After that, it will briefly and succinctly compare the actions of the Supreme Court in both the First and Sixth Republics of Brazil. Through doctrinal, jurisprudential and normative sources, we will seek to emphasize the importance of the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil in guaranteeing Brazilian constitutional rights, as well as the need to maintain harmony between the Powers.

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

References
More filters
Judicialização, ativismo judicial e legitimidade democrática

[...]

Luís Roberto Barroso1•
Rio de Janeiro State University1
23 Nov 2009
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyse certain signs of particular relevance in this phenomenon: the judicialisation of life, judicial activism and its incidence on democracy in Brazil and its Federal Supreme Court.
Abstract: There has been progressive growth in the powers of the constitutional jurisdiction in many countries. Brazil and its Federal Supreme Court has been no exception. However, we can analyse certain signs of particular relevance in this phenomenon: the judicialisation of life, judicial activism and its incidence on democracy.

86 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Dworkin versus cappelletti: qual o modelo de juiz adequado ao estado democrático de direito?

[...]

Fernando Hoffmam, Larissa Nunes Cavalheiro, Valéria Ribas do Nascimento
23 Jul 2011
TL;DR: The modelos cappellettiano and dworkiniano, partindo-se da relacao entre o modelo de jurisdicação e de magistrado, buscar-se a chegar a novo modelo of jurisdicião e, sobremodo, de juiz, which deve estar blindada contra todo o tipo de decisionismos e arbitrariedades judiciais as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Com a chegada do Estado Social e a necessidade da implementacao de varios direitos antes negligenciados pelo Estado, o judiciario ve-se desafiado a participar de tal processo de implementacao da chamada questao social. No entanto, quando se adentra o paradigma Estado Democratico de Direito, esta situacao desafiadora aumenta em complexidade e, em quantidade. Desta forma, exige-se um novo perfil de jurisdicao e de magistrado. Assim sendo, partindo-se da relacao entre os modelos cappellettiano e dworkiniano, buscar-se-a chegar a um novo modelo de jurisdicao e, sobremodo, de juiz. Jurisdicao esta, que deve estar blindada contra todo o tipo de decisionismos e arbitrariedades judiciais. Diante disso, o juiz, embora tenha discricionariedade – nao no sentido forte –, deve ser responsavel social e constitucionalmente e, capaz de concretizar e garantir os direitos oriundos do novo paradigma juridico-estatal, bem como do novo constitucionalismo que o forjou.

4 citations

Judicialização e ativismo judicial na perspectiva do estado democrático de direito

[...]

Lucas Lobato Magioni1•
Universidade Positivo1
06 May 2016
TL;DR: The legal thought has undergone significant historical changes that increased the role of interpreter and law applicator and hence created greater autonomy of the judiciary in relation to the legislative branch: judges are not anymore the "mouth of the law" and became partners in the law-making process as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The legal thought has undergone significant historical changes that increased the role of interpreter and law applicator and hence created greater autonomy of the judiciary in relation to the legislative branch: judges are not anymore the “mouth of the law” and became partners in the law-making process. In addition, the new constitutional reality sets a pretentious social project and ensures substantial guarantee to the material rights, judicializing various issues of life, which resizes the judiciary and makes it active in the process of realization of promises and democratic values, obliging the government to take the necessary measures to carry out constitutionally guaranteed rights. The judiciary thus now has greater autonomy in this constitutional jurisdiction scenario. It took a leading role and has occupied the voids caused by the omission and shortcomings of the other powers, so that the legalization and judicial activism have been used as remedies to enforce the Constitution, to give more effective application to legal rules and to advance the process of democratic consolidation.

2 citations