scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Constitutional law

About: Constitutional law is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 11500 publications have been published within this topic receiving 86317 citations.


Papers
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1997
TL;DR: A Reconstructive Approach to Law I: The System of Rights as discussed by the authors The Indeterminacy of Law and the Rationality of Adjudication The Reconstruction of Law II: The Principles of the Constitutional State.
Abstract: Translatora s Introduction. Preface. 1. Law as a Category of Social Mediation between Facts and Norms. 2. The Sociology of Law versus the Philosophy of Justice. 3. A Reconstructive Approach to Law I: The System of Rights. 4. A Reconstructive Approach to Law II: The Principles of the Constitutional State. 5. The Indeterminacy of Law and the Rationality of Adjudication. 6. Judiciary and Legislature: On the Role and Legitimacy of Constitutional Adjudication. 7. Deliberative Politics: A Procedural Concept of Democracy. 8. Civil Society and the Political Public Sphere. 9. Paradigms of Law. Postscript (1994). Appendices. Notes. Bibliography. Index.

1,734 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The course is focused on historical texts, most of them philosophical as discussed by the authors, and context for understanding the texts and the course of democratic development will be provided in lecture and discussions, and by some background readings (Dunn).
Abstract: The course is focused on historical texts, most of them philosophical. Context for understanding the texts and the course of democratic development will be provided in lecture and discussions, and by some background readings (Dunn). We begin with the remarkable Athenian democracy, and its frequent enemy the Spartan oligarchy. In Athens legislation was passed directly by an assembly of all citizens, and executive officials were selected by lot rather than by competitive election. Athenian oligarchs such as Plato more admired Sparta, and their disdain for the democracy became the judgment of the ages, until well after the modern democratic revolutions. Marsilius of Padua in the early Middle Ages argued for popular sovereignty. The Italian citystates of the Middle Ages did without kings, and looked back to Rome and Greece for republican models. During the English Civil War republicans debated whether the few or the many should be full citizens of the regime. The English, French, and American revolutions struggled with justifying and establishing a representative democracy suitable for a large state, and relied on election rather than lot to select officials. The English established a constitutional monarchy, admired in Europe, and adapted by the Americans in their republican constitution. The American Revolution helped inspire the French, and the French inspired republican and democratic revolution throughout Europe during the 19 century.

1,210 citations

Book
01 Jan 1960
TL;DR: The Law of the Constraint of Parliament as mentioned in this paper was a starting point for the study of the English Constitution and comparative constitutional law, and it remains, to this day, a starting-point for the comparative analysis of the two constitutions.
Abstract: A year after the publication of Dicey's LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION, William Gladstone was reading it aloud in the House of Commons, citing it as authority. It remains, to this day, a starting point for the study of the English Constitution and comparative constitutional law. THE LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION elucidates the guiding principles of the modern constitution of England: the legislative sovereignty of Parliament, the rule of law, and the binding force of unwritten conventions. Dicey's goal was "to provide students with a manual which may impress these leading principles on their minds, and thus may enable them to study with benefit in Blackstone's Commentaries and other treatises of the like nature those legal topics which, taken together, make up the constitutional law of England."

1,033 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Waldon as discussed by the authors argues that there is no reason to suppose that rights are better protected by this practice than they would be by democratic legislatures. But, quite apart from the outcomes it generates, judicial review is democratically illegitimate.
Abstract: This Essay states the general case against judicial review of legislation clearly and in a way that is uncluttered by discussions of particular decisions or the history of its emergence in particular systems of constitutional law. The Essay criticizes judicial review on two main grounds. First, it argues that there is no reason to suppose that rights are better protected by this practice than they would be by democratic legislatures. Second, it argues that, quite apart from the outcomes it generates, judicial review is democratically illegitimate. The second argument is familiar; the first argument less so. However, the case against judicial review is not absolute or unconditional. In this Essay, it is premised on a number of conditions, including that the society in question has good working democratic institutions and that most of its citizens take rights seriously (even if they may disagree about what rights they have). The Essay ends by considering what follows from the failure of these conditions. author. University Professor in the School of Law, Columbia University. (From July 2006, Professor of Law, New York University.) Earlier versions of this Essay were presented at the Colloquium in Legal and Social Philosophy at University College London, at a law faculty workshop at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and at a constitutional law conference at Harvard Law School. I am particularly grateful to Ronald Dworkin, Ruth Gavison, and Seana Shiffrin for their formal comments on those occasions and also to James Allan, Aharon Barak, Richard Bellamy, Aileen Cavanagh, Arthur Chaskalson, Michael Dorf, Richard Fallon, Charles Fried, Andrew Geddis, Stephen Guest, Ian Haney-Lopez, Alon Harel, David Heyd, Sam Issacharoff, Elena Kagan, Kenneth Keith, Michael Klarman, John Manning, Andrei Marmor, Frank Michelman, Henry Monaghan, Veronique Munoz-Darde, John Morley, Matthew Palmer, Richard Pildes, Joseph Raz, Carol Sanger, David Wiggins, and Jo Wolff for their suggestions and criticisms. Hundreds of others have argued with me about this issue over the years: This Essay is dedicated to all of them, collegially and with thanks. WALDRON 3/23/2006 6:53:29 PM the core of the case against judicial review

667 citations

01 Jan 1887

449 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Supreme court
41.8K papers, 306.7K citations
92% related
Common law
30.1K papers, 280.7K citations
89% related
Comparative law
25.6K papers, 311.2K citations
85% related
Public law
25.6K papers, 296.9K citations
85% related
Fundamental rights
21.4K papers, 281.6K citations
84% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
202365
2022161
2021183
2020301
2019390
2018369