Deliberation and Courts

Dados Bibliográficos

ID10830546
AutoresDonald Bello Hutt (0000-0003-2979-6631)
Ano2017
Volume64
Fascículo152
Páginas77-103
Data de publicação2017-09-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoTHEORIA An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0495-4548 • E-ISSN: 2171-679X
EditoraBerghahn Books (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.3167/th.2017.6415204
OpenAlexW2774080590
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas54

We lack analyses of the judiciary from a systemic perspective. This article thus examines arguments offered by deliberativists who have reflected about this institution and argues that the current state of deliberative democracy requires us to rethink the ways they conceive of the judiciary within a deliberative framework. After an examination of these accounts, I define the deliberative system and describe the different phases deliberative democracy has gone through. I then single out elements common to all systemic approaches against which I test whether the regard that the authors show for the judiciary in deliberative terms can be maintained and argue in the negative. I conclude by pointing at the necessity to think about the definition of deliberative systems, and to the value of these discussions for debates on the legitimacy of judicial review when it is exercised under the form of judicial supremacy

Deliberation · Deliberative democracy · Democracy · Democratic legitimacy · Epistemology · Institution · Law and economics · Legitimacy · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Sociology · State (computer science · Value (mathematics · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics