Topic 9. Judicial review in a comparative perspective, Ejercicios de Derecho. Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)
pompeu21
pompeu21

Topic 9. Judicial review in a comparative perspective, Ejercicios de Derecho. Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)

10 páginas
6Número de visitas
Descripción
Asignatura: LEGAL ENGLISH, Profesor: Joan Solanes, Carrera: Dret, Universidad: UPF
20 Puntos
Puntos necesarios para descargar
este documento
Descarga el documento
Vista previa3 páginas / 10
Esta solo es una vista previa
3 páginas mostradas de 10 páginas totales
Descarga el documento
Esta solo es una vista previa
3 páginas mostradas de 10 páginas totales
Descarga el documento
Esta solo es una vista previa
3 páginas mostradas de 10 páginas totales
Descarga el documento
Esta solo es una vista previa
3 páginas mostradas de 10 páginas totales
Descarga el documento
Topic 3. Constitutional Law of the United States

The origins of the U.S. Judicial

review (I): the founders thought

 The U.S. Constitution

 The prerequisites of judicial review: a normative, supreme and rigid Constitution

 Are these prerequisites in the U.S. Constitution itself ?

 The Federalist Paper nº78: founders’ thought

 The roots of judicial review: constituent vs. constituted powers / Constitution as a fundamental law / Constitution as the will of people

 The conception of the judiciary department: the least dangerous branch / the interpretation of the laws belongs to judges

 The power of the judiciary: declare a legislative act void

 The European legal thought about judicial review in the earliest days

 British constitutionalism: an unwritten constitution

 French constitutionalism: far away from judicial review

The origins of the U.S. Judicial

review (II): Marbury v. Madison

 Facts

 The establishment of judicial review (1803): three arguments

 A written Constitution: a normative Constitution

 The nature of judicial function: solving conflict of laws

 Judge’s oath of office to support the Constitution

 The denial of a writ of mandamus: the U.S. Supreme Court searching his role among powers

U.S. Judicial review: a

decentralized model

 Concept of judicial review

 Power to review legislative acts under the Constitution and annul or set them

aside in case of unconstitutionality

 Who is in charge of judicial review? All judges

 U.S. Constitution: federal judges

 States Constitutions: state judges

 Conflict between U.S. Constitution and state law: federal judges

 Kind of analysis: a case-based analysis (facts and parties)

 Effects of the judicial review

 Declaration of unconstitutionality: setting aside the legislation, no

general/erga omnes effect

 The precedent / stare decisis: an indirect way to achieve erga omnes effect

Evolution of U.S. Judicial review:

1789-1930 (pre-New Deal era)

 The first years: emergence

 Jay-Rutledge-Ellsworth courts (1789-1801): few cases

 John Marshall Court (1801-1835)

 Establishment of judicial review (Marbury v. Madison)

 Framing federalism: balancing federal and state powers (McCulloch v. Maryland / Gibbons v. Ogden)

 The pre-civil war period: Taney Court (1836-1864)

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

 The Lochner era: Chase-Waite-Fuller-White-Taft (1864-1930)

 New Civil Law Amendments

 Substantive due process: Lochner v. New York (1905)

Evolution of U.S. Judicial review:

1930-present (post-New Deal era)

 U.S. Supreme Court accommodates to New Deal

 Hughes-Stone-Vinson Courts (1930-1953)

 Deference to economic and social legislation and the enhancement of federal powers

 Warren Court (1953-1969)

 Strict/intermediate scrutiny for fundamental rights: Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

 Burger Court (1969-1986)

 Following the path of strong judicial review in some cases: Roe v. Wade (1973)

 Less judicial activism in others: death penalty, affirmative action, campaign-financing regulations

 Rehnquist (1986-2005) and Roberts Courts (2005-present)

 Fights between conservatives and liberals: the abortion debate

The European continental judicial

review: origins

 Pre-Second World War period: old constitutionalism

 British constitutionalism: no written Constitution

 French constitutionalism: political constitution, bad conception of judges

 Post-Second World War period: new constitutionalism

 New foundations (limited democracy): a normative Constitution, written, supreme and rigid; protection of fundamental rights

 The new foundations are taken seriously: judges and judicial review as a guarantee

 The international dimension of constitutionalism: the international human rights movement

The European continental judicial

review: a centralized model

 Who is in charge of judicial review?

 All judges interpret law according to the Constitution

 Constitutional Courts: monopoly of the declaration of unconstitutionality of the legislation

 Kind of analysis

 Abstract: recurso de inconstitucionalidad

 Case-based: recurso de amparo, cuestión de constitucionalidad

 Effects of the judicial review

 Declaration of unconstitutionality: annulation and general/erga omnes effect

The transformation of the European

continental judicial review

 European integration: EU law and its challenges

 The loss of the constitutional supremacy?

 The centralized model of judicial review in question

 The monopoly of the Constitutional Courts

 The decentralized model of EU law

 International courts and national courts: assimilation v. resistance (or a third way: dialogue)

 Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)

 European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Judicial review and the democratic

objection

 The question: what is the legitimization of a judge to review legislation that is approved by a democratic Parliament?

 Arguments against judicial review: procedural-democracy theories

 Arguments in favor of judicial review: substantive democracy theories

 Protection of democracy itself: procedural rights

 Limited democracy/constitutionalism: protection of fundamental rights and minorities

 Judicial review and its place in a substantive democracy theories

 Advantages of the judicial process: specialization, reflection, separation from politics, equality of parties

 Bolstering democratic legitimization of judges: Constitutional Courts

No hay comentarios
Esta solo es una vista previa
3 páginas mostradas de 10 páginas totales
Descarga el documento