scholarly journals Choosing Justices: A Political Appointments Process and the Wages of Judicial Supremacy

2000 ◽  
Vol 98 (6) ◽  
pp. 1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Yoo ◽  
Terri Jennings Peretti ◽  
David Alistair Yalof
Author(s):  
Kira D. Jumet

This chapter outlines the individual grievances arising from political, economic, social, and religious conditions under the government of Mohamed Morsi that became the foundations of opposition to his rule. It focuses on democracy in Egypt, the 2012 presidential elections, and the expectations and promises put forth by Morsi. The chapter also covers popular perceptions of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party, grievances surrounding electricity and gas, security and sexual harassment, Morsi’s speeches and representation of Egypt on the international stage, and Morsi’s political appointments. The chapter relies on interview data and fieldwork conducted in Egypt during the year of Morsi’s presidency.


1986 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter F. Murphy

The question of WHO is the ultimate constitutional interpreter poses one of the fundamental problems with which a coherent constitutional theory must come to grips. Any answer will be closely connected to other basic theoretical interrogatives, such as WHAT is the constitution and HOW should it be interpreted. Three principal theories compete here: Judicial supremacy, legislative supremacy, and departmentalism. This paper suggests a sort of analysis that transforms the question of WHO from one that yields a universally applicable response into a more complex set of queries about degrees of deference one institution owes another under varying circumstances. What emerges is a modified version of departmentalism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document