Suchergebnisse

"This book is the first collection of its kind exploring common law constitutional rights. It offers a detailed and comparative analysis of the content and role of individual common law constitutional rights in judicial decision-making; and a series of essays offering a range of perspectives on the constitutional significance and rights implications of this development. There is a developing body of legal reasoning in the United Kingdom Supreme Court that has championed common law constitutional rights. Indeed various members of the senior judiciary have asserted the primary role of common law constitutional rights and critiqued legal arguments based first and foremost on the Human Rights Act 1998. This shift in legal reasoning has created a sense amongst both scholars and the judiciary that something significant is happening here, and was recently described by Lady Hale as 'UK constitutionalism on the march'. This collection brings together leading constitutional scholars to analyse this significant development for the first time"--

In 1970 Belgium established three Communities: the French, Flemish and German-speaking Communities. It was then in 1980 that three regions were set up: Walloon, Flemish and Brussels. Further amendments to the Constitution were made on 7 and 15 July 1988, as well as a special law of 8 August 1988 amending the original law of 8 August 1980. It is essential to say that most of the changes and principles governing the organisation and functioning of both the three Communities and the three regions date back to 1970 and 1980. The international nature of the Community's role in 1970 is significant. In 1980, an Arbitration Court was provided for by the Constitution and established to settle conflicts between the laws and decrees of the Communities and the Regions. The Federal State is characterised by two features: autonomy and co-operation. In 1988, the Arbitration Court continued the work of constitutional justice and verifies the conformity of laws or decrees with the provisions of international law and in particular European law. ; En 1970 la Belgique a instauré trois Communautés : les Communautés française, flamande et germanophone. Puis c'est en 1980 que se sont mises en place trois Régions : wallonne, flamande et bruxelloise. De nouveaux amendements à la Constitution ont été faits le 7 et le 15 juillet 1988, ainsi qu'une loi spéciale du 8 août 1988 qui est venue modifier la loi originale du 8 août 1980. Il est indispensable de dire que l'essentiel des changements et des principes d'organisation et de fonctionnement des trois Communautés aussi bien que des trois Régions datent de 1970 et de 1980. Le caractère international du rôle que les Communautés ont joué en 1970 est significatif. En 1980, une Cour d'arbitrage a été prévue par la Constitution et créée afin de régler les conflits entre les lois et les décrets des Communautés et des Régions. L'Etat fédéral se caractérise par deux traits : l'autonomie et la co-opération. En 1988 la Cour d'arbitrage poursuit l'oeuvre de justice constitutionnelle et vérifie la ...

In The Oxford Introductions to U.S. Law: Constitutional Law, Professors Michael C. Dorf and Trevor W. Morrison discuss the relationships between the branches of federal government, between the federal and state governments, and between the government and the individual. They describe American constitutional law as a mechanism for allocating decision-making authority - that is, for deciding who decides. They also discuss the extent to which judges and Justices may substitute their own constitutional judgment for that of elected officials.

Recent war powers debates have seen the emergence of two opposing viewpoints. Those who advocate close adherence to the Constitution and who assume congressional predominance in matters of war have squared off against those who point to modern political realities that require presidential independence and power. This article argues that the resulting interpretive dichotomy is both false and unnecessary. The Constitution created a vigorous executive in the conduct of foreign affairs, checked and balanced by an equally powerful Congress. This is borne out by analysis of the language of the Constitution, by an examination of its intent, and by judicial doctrine. An additional method of interpretation, structural argument, integrates text, intent, and doctrine and provides a theoretically sound and politically feasible framework for the exercise of the war power by the political branches.

The human rights movement has spent considerable energy developing and promoting the adoption of both international and domestic legal prohibitions against torture. Empirical scholarship testing the effectiveness of these prohibitions using observational data, however, has produced mixed results. In this paper, we explore one possible mechanism through which these prohibitions may be effective: dampening public support for torture. Specifically, we conducted a survey experiment to explore the impact of international and constitutional law on public support for torture. We found that a bare majority of respondents in our control group support the use of torture, and that presenting respondents with arguments that this practice violates international law or constitutional law did not produce a statistically significant decrease in support. These findings are consistent with prior research suggesting, even in democracies, that legal prohibitions on torture have been ineffective.

This contribution revisits the phenomenon of 'reverse discrimination in the light of the latest Treaty amendments, recent developments in the CJEU's case law and evolutions in the law of selected Member States. It follows that 'reverse discrimination' caused by national measures applying to internal situations in non-harmonized policy fields remains acceptable under EU law as a matter of principle. The Union's non-unitary constitutional structure compels the CJEU to exercise judicial restraint when reviewing such rules against the fundamental freedoms of the Treaties as long as the Union legislator does not address the issue. Although the CJEU's traditional and increasingly incoherent case-law on 'purely internal situations' is not a necessary corollary of this reasoning, alternative judicial approaches risk unduly undermining Member States' competences and constitutional identities. Whilst much of the academic debate on reverse discrimination focuses on possible remedies under EU law, this paper also looks at solutions available under national law. Member States are well equipped to address reverse discrimination and to progressively live up to their responsibility in this respect. Evidence from different Member States suggests that national law (subject to an external control of the ECtHR) can provide a valuable and effective tool to assess whether or not restrictions of individual freedoms can be justified by overriding constitutionally recognized principles.