scholarly journals Constitucionalismo Democrático versus Minimalismo Judicial

Author(s):  
Maria Eugenia Bunchaft
Keyword(s):  

Um dos tópicos mais controversos da filosofia constitucional é o debate relativo ao papel da jurisdição constitucional no âmbito da separação dos poderes. O processo contemporâneo denominado judicialização da política possui legitimidade democrática ? Cass Sunstein delineia a tese de um “minimalismo judicial,” de acordo com o qual as Cortes não deveriam decidir questões desnecessárias na resolução de um caso, de forma a respeitar seus próprios precedentes e exercer as denominadas “virtudes passivas”, no que se refere ao uso construtivo do silêncio. Robert Post e Reva Siegel, todavia, ambos professores da Yale Law School, sustentam que, muitas vezes, minorias estigmatizadas e movimentos sociais pressionam o Judiciário a interpretar a Constituição de forma juridicamente sensível a suas pretensões. Pretendemos apresentar a contraposição teórica entre o “minimalismo judicial” de Cass Sunstein e o “Constitucionalismo Democrático” desenvolvido por Robert Post e Reva Siegel, pois tal discussão enriquece e elucida a filosofia política contemporânea sobre os limites de atuação da jurisdição constitucional na proteção de minorias.

Author(s):  
Maria Eugenia Bunchaft
Keyword(s):  

Um dos tpicos mais controversos da filosofia constitucional o debate relativo ao papel da jurisdio constitucional no mbito da separao dos poderes. O processo contemporneo denominado judicializao da poltica possui legitimidade democrtica ? Cass Sunstein delineia a tese de um minimalismo judicial, de acordo com o qual as Cortes no deveriam decidir questes desnecessrias na resoluo de um caso, de forma a respeitar seus prprios precedentes e exercer as denominadas virtudes passivas, no que se refere ao uso construtivo do silncio.Robert Post e Reva Siegel, todavia, ambos professores da Yale Law School, sustentam que, muitas vezes, minorias estigmatizadas e movimentos sociais pressionam o Judicirio a interpretar a Constituio de forma juridicamente sensvel a suas pretenses. Pretendemos apresentar a contraposio terica entre o minimalismo judicial de Cass Sunstein e o Constitucionalismo Democrtico desenvolvido por Robert Post e Reva Siegel, pois tal discusso enriquece e elucida a filosofia poltica contempornea sobre os limites de atuao da jurisdio constitucional na proteo de minorias.


PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick H. DeLeon
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Mugambi Jouet

Americans are far more divided than other Westerners over basic issues, including wealth inequality, health care, climate change, evolution, the literal truth of the Bible, apocalyptical prophecies, gender roles, abortion, gay rights, sexual education, gun control, mass incarceration, the death penalty, torture, human rights, and war. The intense polarization of U.S. conservatives and liberals has become a key dimension of American exceptionalism—an idea widely misunderstood as American superiority. It is rather what makes America an exception, for better or worse. While exceptionalism once was largely a source of strength, it may now spell decline, as unique features of U.S. history, politics, law, culture, religion, and race relations foster grave conflicts and injustices. They also shed light on the peculiar ideological evolution of American conservatism, which long predated Trumpism. Anti-intellectualism, conspiracy-mongering, radical anti-governmentalism, and Christian fundamentalism are far more common in America than Europe, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Drawing inspiration from Alexis de Tocqueville, Mugambi Jouet explores American exceptionalism’s intriguing roots as a multicultural outsider-insider. Raised in Paris by a French mother and Kenyan father, he then lived throughout America, from the Bible Belt to New York, California, and beyond. His articles have notably been featured in The New Republic, Slate, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Huffington Post, and Le Monde. He teaches at Stanford Law School.


2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-185
Author(s):  
Edyta Sokalska

The reception of common law in the United States was stimulated by a very popular and influential treatise Commentaries on the Laws of England by Sir William Blackstone, published in the late 18th century. The work of Blackstone strengthened the continued reception of the common law from the American colonies into the constituent states. Because of the large measure of sovereignty of the states, common law had not exactly developed in the same way in every state. Despite the fact that a single common law was originally exported from England to America, a great variety of factors had led to the development of different common law rules in different states. Albert W. Alschuler from University of Chicago Law School is one of the contemporary American professors of law. The part of his works can be assumed as academic historical-legal narrations, especially those concerning Blackstone: Rediscovering Blackstone and Sir William Blackstone and the Shaping of American Law. Alschuler argues that Blackstone’s Commentaries inspired the evolution of American and British law. He introduces not only the profile of William Blackstone, but also examines to which extent the concepts of Blackstone have become the basis for the development of the American legal thought.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document