Add to ORKGMark Tushnet has written a great critique of constitutional judicial review. With his sure grasp of the scholarship, his commit- ment to the issues and the real people behind them, and his methodical, flawless reasoning, he has effectively blasted the theoretical foundations of judicial constitutional law to smithereens. As such, he has made a valuable contribution to legal scholarship that will remain so for a long time to come
Book review: On constitutional disobedience. By Louis Michael Seidman. New York, N.Y.: Oxford Univer...
The ongoing debates over the legitimacy of judicial review-the power of courts to strike down uncons...
Judicial supremacy is the new judicial review. From the time Alexander Bickel introduced the term c...
Constitutional review is the activity of measuring action choices of governments against a pre-exist...
This contribution aims at discussing constitutional democracy in the age of populisms, by explaining...
Professor Mark Tushnet challenges the view that democratic constitutionalism requires courts to domi...
In this Book Review, Professor Fleming examines Professor Tushnet\u27s arguments against judicial su...
In the last decade, it has become increasingly trendy to question whether the Supreme Court and cons...
In this contribution to the Quinnipiac Law Review’s annual symposium edition, this year devoted to t...
In 1988, Mark Tushnet noted the revival of grand theory in constitutional law. Tushnet was somewha...
In this piece reviewing Mark Tushnet\u27s The New Constitutional Order, David Fontana argues that ...
Several of the nation\u27s most influential constitutional law scholars have been arguing for the be...
A treatment of recent criticism of judicial review concentrating on its theoretical consistency, sc...
A world without judicial review? Not that long ago-when the Left fought tooth and nail to defend the...
Two hundred years after its most famous invocation in Marbury v. Madison, judicial review has appare...
Book review: On constitutional disobedience. By Louis Michael Seidman. New York, N.Y.: Oxford Univer...
The ongoing debates over the legitimacy of judicial review-the power of courts to strike down uncons...
Judicial supremacy is the new judicial review. From the time Alexander Bickel introduced the term c...
Constitutional review is the activity of measuring action choices of governments against a pre-exist...
This contribution aims at discussing constitutional democracy in the age of populisms, by explaining...
Professor Mark Tushnet challenges the view that democratic constitutionalism requires courts to domi...
In this Book Review, Professor Fleming examines Professor Tushnet\u27s arguments against judicial su...
In the last decade, it has become increasingly trendy to question whether the Supreme Court and cons...
In this contribution to the Quinnipiac Law Review’s annual symposium edition, this year devoted to t...
In 1988, Mark Tushnet noted the revival of grand theory in constitutional law. Tushnet was somewha...
In this piece reviewing Mark Tushnet\u27s The New Constitutional Order, David Fontana argues that ...
Several of the nation\u27s most influential constitutional law scholars have been arguing for the be...
A treatment of recent criticism of judicial review concentrating on its theoretical consistency, sc...
A world without judicial review? Not that long ago-when the Left fought tooth and nail to defend the...
Two hundred years after its most famous invocation in Marbury v. Madison, judicial review has appare...
Book review: On constitutional disobedience. By Louis Michael Seidman. New York, N.Y.: Oxford Univer...
The ongoing debates over the legitimacy of judicial review-the power of courts to strike down uncons...
Judicial supremacy is the new judicial review. From the time Alexander Bickel introduced the term c...