Law, Politics, and Judicial Review
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11587997 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Vukan Kuic (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1990 |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 265-284 |
| Publication date | 1990-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Review of Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0034-6705 • E-ISSN: 1748-6858 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0034670500050373 |
| OpenAlex | W2019136068 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 16 |
The confusion surrounding the current debates on the nature and scope of judicial review is compounded by the failure of the contending parties to relate their positions to a defensible general theory of law and politics. But these debates may also aid in reconstructing such a theory. After a brief survey of four different stands with regard to judicial review, this article concludes by suggesting how the prevailing interpretations of law and politics need to be revised, if judicial review is to be to the Constitution what the practice of government of law is to its theory
Confusion · Constitution · Government (linguistics · Judicial activism · Judicial opinion · Judicial review · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Scope (computer science · Sociology · Criminal Law and Evidence · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal and Constitutional Studies · Philosophy
Democracy and Distrust
The Notion of a Living Constitution
The Promise of American Life
Judicial Review and the National Political Process
Judicial Review and Democracy
The Economic Interpretation of the Constitution
Majority Rule and Minority Rights
The American Doctrine of Judicial Supremacy
Interpretation and Interest
Do We Have an Unwritten Constitution
Taking Rights Seriously
Objectivity and Interpretation
| Highly cited | No |
|---|