Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law
2009. g. jūl. · Princeton University Press
E-grāmata
312
Lappuses
family_home
Piemērota
info
Par šo e-grāmatu
Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights, Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law.
Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.
Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.
Par autoru
Mark Tushnet is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. His many books include The New Constitutional Order and Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts (both Princeton). He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Novērtējiet šo e-grāmatu
Izsakiet savu viedokli!
Informācija lasīšanai
Viedtālruņi un planšetdatori
Instalējiet lietotni Google Play grāmatas Android ierīcēm un iPad planšetdatoriem/iPhone tālruņiem. Lietotne tiks automātiski sinhronizēta ar jūsu kontu un ļaus lasīt saturu tiešsaistē vai bezsaistē neatkarīgi no jūsu atrašanās vietas.
Klēpjdatori un galddatori
Varat klausīties pakalpojumā Google Play iegādātās audiogrāmatas, izmantojot datora tīmekļa pārlūkprogrammu.
E-lasītāji un citas ierīces
Lai lasītu grāmatas tādās elektroniskās tintes ierīcēs kā Kobo e-lasītāji, nepieciešams lejupielādēt failu un pārsūtīt to uz savu ierīci. Izpildiet palīdzības centrā sniegtos detalizētos norādījumus, lai pārsūtītu failus uz atbalstītiem e-lasītājiem.
