审查中的司法审查:法律宪政的四部分辩护——理查德·贝拉米《政治宪政评论》

A. Walen
{"title":"审查中的司法审查:法律宪政的四部分辩护——理查德·贝拉米《政治宪政评论》","authors":"A. Walen","doi":"10.1093/ICON/MOP007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This review focuses on the powerful critique of judicial review published in 2007 by Richard Bellamy. It responds to his central theses, drawing in significant part from the work of Mattias Kumm and, at the same time, offering a novel defense of constitutionalism and judicial review. This defense argues that certain of the costs of judicial review are worth bearing in order to keep alive the lessons of history embodied in constitutions, lest future generations forget history and, thereby, prove doomed to repeat it.","PeriodicalId":205352,"journal":{"name":"U.S. Constitutional Law: Interpretation & Judicial Review eJournal","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Judicial Review in Review: A Four-Part Defense of Legal Constitutionalism - A Review Essay on Political Constitutionalism, by Richard Bellamy\",\"authors\":\"A. Walen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ICON/MOP007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This review focuses on the powerful critique of judicial review published in 2007 by Richard Bellamy. It responds to his central theses, drawing in significant part from the work of Mattias Kumm and, at the same time, offering a novel defense of constitutionalism and judicial review. This defense argues that certain of the costs of judicial review are worth bearing in order to keep alive the lessons of history embodied in constitutions, lest future generations forget history and, thereby, prove doomed to repeat it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":205352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"U.S. Constitutional Law: Interpretation & Judicial Review eJournal\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"U.S. Constitutional Law: Interpretation & Judicial Review eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ICON/MOP007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"U.S. Constitutional Law: Interpretation & Judicial Review eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ICON/MOP007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

这篇评论聚焦于理查德·贝拉米2007年发表的对司法审查的有力批判。它回应了他的中心论点,在很大程度上借鉴了马蒂亚斯·库姆(Mattias Kumm)的著作,同时为宪政和司法审查提供了一种新颖的辩护。这种辩护认为,司法审查的某些成本是值得承担的,以便保持宪法所体现的历史教训的活力,以免后代忘记历史,从而证明注定要重蹈覆辙。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Judicial Review in Review: A Four-Part Defense of Legal Constitutionalism - A Review Essay on Political Constitutionalism, by Richard Bellamy
This review focuses on the powerful critique of judicial review published in 2007 by Richard Bellamy. It responds to his central theses, drawing in significant part from the work of Mattias Kumm and, at the same time, offering a novel defense of constitutionalism and judicial review. This defense argues that certain of the costs of judicial review are worth bearing in order to keep alive the lessons of history embodied in constitutions, lest future generations forget history and, thereby, prove doomed to repeat it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信