JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE POLITICAL CONSTITUTIONALISM AND LEGAL CONSTITUTIONALISM

Main Article Content

Ludmila Lais Costa Lacerda

Abstract

The aim of this study is to generate a debate on the Judicial Review arrangement considering questions  about  the  representativeness,  supremacy  and  institutional  competence  in  a democratic  system  with  separation  of  powers.  We  intend  to  investigate  theoretical perspectives  for  an  institutional  dialogue  construction  process  of  decisions  under  the historical perspective and designation of the 'last word'. The study will be conducted from the theoretical approach of authors Jeremy Waldron, Richard Bellamy, Ronald Dworkin and David  Dyzenhaus  and  arguments  of  the  proposals  'Political  Constitutionalism'  (more approximate to political positivism) and 'Legal Constitutionalism'. The prospects can be considered complementary to the extent that stresses and are proposed construction and modification  in  the  practice  of  institutionalized  public  decisions.  The  three  powers (legislative, executive and judiciary) establish relations through dialogues, including arrangements such as Judicial Review from disagreements and institutional discussions. Interests that this dialogue does not configure mere destructive dispute with institutional competition issues illusions about the ultimate and monopoly of authority, but that would encourage opportunities and conditions for mutual cooperation and coordination with built decisions more democratic and legitimate way, considering development (social, political and legal), convergent adjustments and history of a community.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
LACERDA, Ludmila Lais Costa. JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE POLITICAL CONSTITUTIONALISM AND LEGAL CONSTITUTIONALISM. Revista Brasileira de Teoria Constitucional, Florianopolis, Brasil, v. 1, n. 1, 2015. DOI: 10.26668/IndexLawJournals/2525-961X/2015.v1i1.139. Disponível em: https://indexlaw.org/index.php/teoriaconstitucional/article/view/139. Acesso em: 22 dec. 2024.
Section
Artigos
Author Biography

Ludmila Lais Costa Lacerda, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG, Minas Gerais, Brasil

Mestre em Direito pela Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - UFMG, Minas Gerais, Brasil

References

BELLAMY, R (2007). Political constitutionalism and the Human Rights Act. International

Journal of Constitutional Law - I-CON, 2011, Vol. 9, n. 1, p. 86-111.

DYZENHAUS, David. The Incoherence of Constitutional Positivism. In. HUSCROFT, Grant (org). Expounding the Constitution: Essays in Constitutional Theory. Cambrdige: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2008.

DWORKIN, Ronald. O Império do Direito. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1999. DWORKIN, Ronald. Levando os Direitos a Sério. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2002. DWORKIN, Ronald. Uma questão de principio. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000. DWORKIN, Ronald. A virtude soberana: a teoria e a prática da igualdade. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.

DWORKIN, Ronald. Direito da liberdade: a leitura moral da Constituição norte-americana. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2006.

DWORKIN, Ronald. A Justiça de Toga. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2010.

FERNANDES, Bernardo Gonçalves. Curso de Direito Constitucional. 3.ed. Rio de Janeiro: Lumen Juris, 2011.

HÜBNER MENDES, Conrado. Controle de constitucionalidade e democracia. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, 2008.

KELSEN, Hans. A democracia. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000.

PITKIN, Hanna. Obligation and Consent – II. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 60, No. 1, 1966.

WALDRON, Jeremy. Law and disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. WALDRON, Jeremy. The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review. The Yale Law Journal, v. 115, 2006.

WALDRON, Jeremy. Do judges reason morally?. In. HUSCROFT, Grant (org). Expounding the Constitution: Essays in Constitutional Theory. Cambrdige: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2008.