13 results on '"Waldron, Jeremy"'
Search Results
2. The Core of the Case against Judicial Review
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Published
- 2006
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Freeman's Defense of Judicial Review
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Published
- 1994
4. CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE E LEGITIMIDADE POLÍTICA
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
constitutional courts ,democracy ,legitimidad política ,cortes constitucionais ,constitutional law ,legitimidade política ,derecho constitucional ,Control de constitucionalidad ,direito constitucional ,cortes constitucionales ,democracia ,Controle de constitucionalidade ,Judicial review ,political legitimacy - Abstract
Resumen Este artículo analiza la relación entre el control judicial de constitucionalidad y la legitimidad política entendida como la capacidad de un sistema político y jurídico de generar respaldo para la implementación de las leyes y políticas, incluso por parte de aquellos que se opusieron a estas por razones sustanciales. El artículo señala que a pesar de que existen diferentes modalidades de control judicial, así como diversas y respetables clases de legitimidad que se derivan de la función judicial, el control de constitucionalidad no está diseñado para producir legitimidad política. En tal sentido, y ante la imposibilidad de solventar esta dificultad democrática, se propone una serie de mecanismos para mitigarla como es el caso de la exigencia de supermayorías para decidir, la necesidad de contar con una presunción fuerte de constitucionalidad y la obligación de ofrecer razones que aborden explícitamente las preocupaciones democráticas. Finalmente, el artículo hace un llamado a la civilidad en el litigio constitucional, con el fin de evitar la demonización del oponente y abrir espacios de legitimidad política en el control de constitucionalidad. Abstract This article analyzes the relationship between a judicial review of legislation and the principle of political legitimacy understood as the capacity of a legal and political system to generate support for the implementation of laws and policies, even among those who are opposed to them on their merits. The article claims that, despite the existence of multiple forms of judicial review, as well as diverse and respectable sources of legitimacy, judicial review is not designed to generate political legitimacy. In this sense, given the impossibility of solving this ‘democratic difficulty,’ the article proposes different approaches that might help to mitigate it, as is the case of judicial super-majorities to strike down legislation, following a strong presumption of constitutionality or offering explicit reasons for addressing these democratic concerns. Finally, the article calls for civility in constitutional litigation in order to prevent demonization of the opponent and to open the door to political legitimacy in the context of judicial review. Resumo Este artigo analisa a relação entre o controle judicial de constitucionalidade e a legitimidade política entendida como a capacidade de um sistema político e jurídico de gerar respaldo para a implementação das leis e políticas, inclusive por parte daqueles que se opuseram a elas por razões substanciais. O artigo aponta que, apesar de existirem diferentes modalidades de controle judicial, assim como diversas e respeitáveis classes de legitimidade que derivam da função judicial, o controle de constitucionalidade não foi traçado para produzir legitimidade política. Nesse sentido, e diante da impossibilidade de solucionar essa dificuldade democrática, propõe-se uma série de mecanismos para mitigá-la, como é o caso da exigência de supermaiorias para decidir, a necessidade de contar com uma forte presunção de constitucionalidade e a obrigação de oferecer razões que abordem explicitamente as preocupações democráticas. Finalmente, o artigo faz um chamado à civilidade no litígio constitucional, com o objetivo de evitar a demonização do oponente e abrir espaços de legitimidade política no controle de constitucionalidade.
- Published
- 2018
5. CONTROL DE CONSTITUCIONALIDAD Y LEGITIMIDAD POLÍTICA.
- Author
-
WALDRON, JEREMY
- Abstract
This article analyzes the relationship between a judicial review of legislation and the principle of political legitimacy understood as the capacity of a legal and political system to generate support for the implementation of laws and policies, even among those who are opposed to them on their merits. The article claims that, despite the existence of multiple forms of judicial review, as well as diverse and respectable sources of legitimacy, judicial review is not designed to generate political legitimacy. In this sense, given the impossibility of solving this 'democratic difficulty,' the article proposes different approaches that might help to mitigate it, as is the case of judicial super-majorities to strike down legislation, following a strong presumption of constitutionality or offering explicit reasons for addressing these democratic concerns. Finally, the article calls for civility in constitutional litigation in order to prevent demonization of the opponent and to open the door to political legitimacy in the context of judicial review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. An exchange with Jeremy Waldron
- Author
-
WALDRON, Jeremy, SADURSKI, Wojciech, DYZENHAUS, David, and BEAUD, Olivier
- Subjects
Legislature ,Judicial review ,Philosophy of law ,Judges ,Reasoning ,Rights ,Judiciary-legislative relations ,Legal systems ,Morality ,Decision making ,Political institutions ,Courts - Published
- 2009
7. LEGISLATURES JUDGING IN THEIR OWN CAUSE.
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
- *
JUDICIAL review , *LEGISLATORS , *CONSTITUTIONAL law , *LEGISLATIVE bills , *STATUTES , *CIVIL rights , *LEGISLATIVE bodies , *ARBITRATION (Administrative law) , *CONSTITUTIONAL amendments - Abstract
The article discusses the logical arguments about judicial review and the legitimate authorities of legislators who are acting as judges to the legislatures. Accordingly, when a statute restrict the liberties and individual rights of the people, the parliamentary supremacy overrules the rights-violation. It adds that the final arbitration rests with the legislature whether to amend or repeal the law in response to any complaint which effectively judge the legislature as an institution in a dispute.
- Published
- 2009
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. Judges as moral reasoners.
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
LEGAL judgments ,ETHICAL decision making ,JUDICIAL review ,ETHICAL absolutism ,MORAL norms ,JUDGES ,ETHICS - Abstract
Debates about judicial authority-including debates about the desirability of judicial review of legislation-sometimes turn on the question of whether judges have superior skills when it comes to addressing what are, essentially, moral issues about rights. This paper considers the possibility that the answer may be "no," not because judges are inept morally, but because the institutional setting in which they act and the role that they adopt both require them to address questions about rights in a particular legalistic way-indeed, in a way that, sometimes, makes it harder rather than easier for essential moral questions to be identified and addressed. Of course, what we want is for moral issues to be addressed, not as one would make a personal moral decision, but in the name of the whole society. Perhaps the judicial mode of addressing them satisfies that description, but there are other ways of satisfying it too-including legislative approaches, which proceed by identifying all the issues and all the opinions that might be relevant to a decision, rather than artificially limiting them in the way that courts do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2009
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. DISAGREEMENT AND RESPONSE.
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
POLITICAL science ,JUDICIAL review ,DEMOCRACY ,MODERN society ,LEGISLATION - Abstract
The article presents the author's response to criticisms on his book "Law and Disagreement." The book is about disagreements on thoughts about political legitimacy and legal and political institutions. It is argued that a liberal theory and a theory of politics should be formed. The author claimed that the practice of judicial review of legislation in the U.S. is not an appropriate or respectful of way of resolving good faith disagreements about rights in a modern democratic community.
- Published
- 2006
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. Judicial Review and the Conditions of Democracy.
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
- *
JUDICIAL review , *CONSTITUTIONAL law , *LEGISLATION , *JURISPRUDENCE - Abstract
Discusses the status of the legitimacy of judicial review of legislation in constitutional jurisprudence in the United States. Comments on the book `Freedom's Law,' by Ronald Dworkin; Effect of constitutional adjudication on the character of public debate.
- Published
- 1998
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. Jeremy Waldron.
- Author
-
Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
- *
JUDICIAL review , *JUDICIAL power , *DEMOCRACY , *CONSTITUTIONAL law - Abstract
Comments on the urge to a judicial review of democracy in the U.S. Right of the public to deserve a forum for working through the disagreements on the issue; Processes involved in the approach of the Supreme Court in reaching decisions involving constitutional controversies; Differences between the courts strategy of coming up with a decision and the approach of legislators in giving their votes.
- Published
- 2005
12. Beyond Judicial Review of Legislation : On the Political Value of Litigation (and Its Relation with Social Activism and the Practical Rationality of Legislatures)
- Author
-
Segatti, Marco, Wintgens, Luc J., Series Editor, Oliver-Lalana, A. Daniel, Series Editor, Aarnio, Aulis, Editorial Board Member, Alexy, Robert, Editorial Board Member, Atienza, Manuel, Editorial Board Member, Campbell, Tom, Editorial Board Member, Quirk, Paul J., Editorial Board Member, Sieckmann, Jan-R., Editorial Board Member, Troper, Michel, Editorial Board Member, Waldron, Jeremy, Editorial Board Member, Ferraro, Francesco, editor, and Zorzetto, Silvia, editor
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. The fragility of justice : political liberalism and the problem of stability
- Author
-
Howard, Jeffrey and Waldron, Jeremy
- Subjects
320.011 ,Political science ,Criminal Law ? Jurisprudence ,Ethics (Moral philosophy) ,political liberalism ,stability ,democracy ,public reason ,judicial review ,punishment ,unreasonable citizens - Abstract
Human powers of moral reasoning and motivation are fragile. How should citizens committed to the achievement of liberal justice respond to this fact? This dissertation theorises a class of moral requirements that are central to the practice of liberal democracy but have been recently overlooked by political philosophers: the fortificational duties, which enjoin citizens to design and submit to civic practices that improve both their moral reasoning and the motivational resilience of their sense of justice. It considers the proposition that a conception of justice is unjustified if unlikely to generate its own freely willed maintenance, or stability, in the face of human nature, and it argues that this proposition is false. If justice may face overwhelming resistance unless steps are taken to fortify ourselves against our own fallibility, the right response is to pursue precisely such fortification. Chapter One sketches the orienting ideal of the dissertation: an ideal of a social world in which citizens live together as free and equal. Chapter Two assesses the proposition that we ought to modify or abandon this ideal if we determine that it is unlikely to be freely realised without serious civic or institutional assistance—a move suggested by John Rawls’s “stability test”—and it argues that the candidate arguments for this conclusion fail. The chapter instead argues that citizens are subject to moral requirements to fortify their sense of justice by designing and submitting to measures that increase the likelihood that they will accurately identify and freely comply with their fundamental moral duties. These measures together constitute a liberal democracy’s “stability charter.” Chapters Three to Six explore proposed elements of citizens’ stability charter. Chapter Three discusses the fortification of moral reasoning through democratic deliberation. Chapter Four considers what institutional mechanisms could keep democracy oriented toward the achievement of justice despite human fallibility, and it defends a minimalist conception of judicial review as a case study. Chapter Five argues that the practice of criminal punishment is justified by the duties of wrongdoers to pursue additional fortificational measures in the aftermath of their moral powers’ defective operation. And Chapter Six focuses on the special problem posed to the enduring achievement of justice by “unreasonable citizens” who reject fundamental liberal values. The distinctive contribution of the dissertation lies, firstly, in its novel appropriation of the Rawlsian ideal of stability—reconceiving stability not as a justificatory condition set by reason on our convictions, but as a practical challenge that our own convictions set for us—and, secondly, in its deployment of that insight to motivate novel arguments about the character of democratic deliberation, the limits and role of judicial review, the proper purposes of criminal punishment, and the ideal method of engagement with unreasonable citizens.
- Published
- 2013
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.