The article analyzes the 570__2013 U.S. Supreme Court’s case considering the objections made by Chief Justice Scalia on the merits and on the appropriateness of this judgment. In particular, references are made on the legitimacy of judicial review in cases involving a violation of fundamental principles. As argued, the aim of supreme judges in constitutional democratic systems is to protect individuals’ rights despite the will of an electoral majority. Thus, this analysis discusses theories of judicial interpretation in order to stress the legitimacy of non-majoritarian decisions in a contemporary constitutional democracy
Most debate about the power of judicial review proceeds as if courts primarily invoke the Constituti...
Among governing institutions, the judiciary has been described as the least dangerous branch. \u27 ...
I was asked to comment on the topic of the conference as it relates to the United States. It is not ...
If the question is whether the Court\u27s recent property rights decisions represent unwarranted jud...
High courts around the world have increasingly invalidated constitutional amendments in defense of t...
There is a problem in our constitutional history: the problem of split Supreme Court decisions inval...
This article critically analyses the recent US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v Hodges, the sa...
The three books reviewed in this essay are recent contributions to the growing literature of constit...
This Essay canvasses Justice Scalia’s approach to the nondelegation doctrine by examining his two mo...
This article will argue that holdings of unconstitutionality in futuro are difficult to reconcile wi...
Justice Scalia is an outspoken conservative acclaimed for his remarkable intellect and scholarship, ...
Amid the fierce battles that take place during the confirmation process of a Supreme Court justice, ...
This Article concerns the interplay between judicial review and Article V of the Constitution, which...
This article addresses the issue of what is fit for a Supreme Court Justice to do and whether the Co...
Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism is a critical study of Justice Antonin Scalia’s jurisp...
Most debate about the power of judicial review proceeds as if courts primarily invoke the Constituti...
Among governing institutions, the judiciary has been described as the least dangerous branch. \u27 ...
I was asked to comment on the topic of the conference as it relates to the United States. It is not ...
If the question is whether the Court\u27s recent property rights decisions represent unwarranted jud...
High courts around the world have increasingly invalidated constitutional amendments in defense of t...
There is a problem in our constitutional history: the problem of split Supreme Court decisions inval...
This article critically analyses the recent US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v Hodges, the sa...
The three books reviewed in this essay are recent contributions to the growing literature of constit...
This Essay canvasses Justice Scalia’s approach to the nondelegation doctrine by examining his two mo...
This article will argue that holdings of unconstitutionality in futuro are difficult to reconcile wi...
Justice Scalia is an outspoken conservative acclaimed for his remarkable intellect and scholarship, ...
Amid the fierce battles that take place during the confirmation process of a Supreme Court justice, ...
This Article concerns the interplay between judicial review and Article V of the Constitution, which...
This article addresses the issue of what is fit for a Supreme Court Justice to do and whether the Co...
Antonin Scalia and American Constitutionalism is a critical study of Justice Antonin Scalia’s jurisp...
Most debate about the power of judicial review proceeds as if courts primarily invoke the Constituti...
Among governing institutions, the judiciary has been described as the least dangerous branch. \u27 ...
I was asked to comment on the topic of the conference as it relates to the United States. It is not ...