Constitutional scholarship has been exploring the idea that the court and the legislature engage in a dialogue over the meaning of the constitution. Yet, despite many contributions to the idea of dialogue over the last decade, its potential remains unfulfilled. The epistemological potential of dialogue remains understudied, in part because the court continues to be viewed as the supreme, if not also the sole, expounder of the constitution. For dialogue's potential to be realized, the legislature should be acknowledged as a co-ordinate actor in expounding constitutional meaning and both court and legislature should assume a disposition for dialogue
This article argues that most normative legal scholarship regarding the role of judicial review rest...
A multifaceted debate over constitutional interpretation dominates contemporary constitutional schol...
State supreme courts occasionally rely on the provisions of their own state constitutions to expand ...
Constitutional scholarship has been exploring the idea that the court and the legislature engage in ...
Constitutional dialogue has become an influential concept to understand the relationship between cou...
A constitution speaks. So my experience as theoretician of constitutional interpretation has taught ...
Legal scholars have been inspired by the dialogic approach and rallied around it as the solution to ...
The concept of 'constitutional dialogue' has become a focal point of US and Canadian public law scho...
Notwithstanding that the new judicial federalism is no longer new, the question remains whether ther...
The first part of this commentary examines the roles of coordinate construction in which legislature...
This paper examines two cases that raise questions about the capacity to secure redress for the limi...
By suggesting that we view the judicial-legislative relationship as a dialogue, the authors of Char...
Dialogue theory regards judicial interpretation of the Charter as authoritative, and, as a result, d...
Much in the field of statutory interpretation is predicated on “interpretive dialogue” between court...
Inside the courts, one might distinguish between constitution-talk and justice-talk on the ground th...
This article argues that most normative legal scholarship regarding the role of judicial review rest...
A multifaceted debate over constitutional interpretation dominates contemporary constitutional schol...
State supreme courts occasionally rely on the provisions of their own state constitutions to expand ...
Constitutional scholarship has been exploring the idea that the court and the legislature engage in ...
Constitutional dialogue has become an influential concept to understand the relationship between cou...
A constitution speaks. So my experience as theoretician of constitutional interpretation has taught ...
Legal scholars have been inspired by the dialogic approach and rallied around it as the solution to ...
The concept of 'constitutional dialogue' has become a focal point of US and Canadian public law scho...
Notwithstanding that the new judicial federalism is no longer new, the question remains whether ther...
The first part of this commentary examines the roles of coordinate construction in which legislature...
This paper examines two cases that raise questions about the capacity to secure redress for the limi...
By suggesting that we view the judicial-legislative relationship as a dialogue, the authors of Char...
Dialogue theory regards judicial interpretation of the Charter as authoritative, and, as a result, d...
Much in the field of statutory interpretation is predicated on “interpretive dialogue” between court...
Inside the courts, one might distinguish between constitution-talk and justice-talk on the ground th...
This article argues that most normative legal scholarship regarding the role of judicial review rest...
A multifaceted debate over constitutional interpretation dominates contemporary constitutional schol...
State supreme courts occasionally rely on the provisions of their own state constitutions to expand ...