Here, Philip Bobbitt studies the basis for the legitimacy of judicial review by examining six types of constitutional argument--historical, textual, structural, prudential doctrinal, and ethical--through the unusual method of contrasting sketches of prominent legal figures responding to the constitutional crises of their day.
Examines the characteristic types of constitutional argument by which judicial review is carried out.
Rezensionen / Stimmen
A fine, thoughtful essay, well-written....Explanation of the typology of legal arguments especially good. * Mary R. Mattingly, Texas A & I University * Extraordinary. This is the outstanding recent work treating Constitutional Law in terms of the legitimating effects of argumentation. It ranks among the most original and impressive works of American jurisprudence to appear during the decade. * Paul Mattson, University of California, Santa Barbara * A subtle examination of the legitimacy of judicial review....Constitutional Fate is an exceptional work....A strong reminder that judicial review, properly undertaken, can serve a variety of functions and guarantee a variety of interests in modern society. * Yale Law Journal * An erudite and cogent presentation....adds a dimension that significantly enriches one's understanding both of judicial review and of much recent academic discussion surrounding it. * American Political Science Review *
Sprache
Verlagsort
Zielgruppe
Für höhere Schule und Studium
Für Beruf und Forschung
Maße
Höhe: 216 mm
Breite: 140 mm
Dicke: 18 mm
Gewicht
ISBN-13
978-0-19-503422-6 (9780195034226)
Copyright in bibliographic data and cover images is held by Nielsen Book Services Limited or by the publishers or by their respective licensors: all rights reserved.
Schweitzer Klassifikation
Autor*in
, University of Texas, Austin
