关于主权债券和大麻:比较美国和欧盟的最高限制

Q2 Social Sciences
M. Moussa
{"title":"关于主权债券和大麻:比较美国和欧盟的最高限制","authors":"M. Moussa","doi":"10.1177/1023263X211048603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Against the background of the PSPP judgement, the article conducts an under-researched comparison of the German Court's recent judgement with incidents of defiance from American states’ legislatures. Particularly, it highlights the example of marijuana laws in the US where a handful of states managed to legislate de facto governing norms contrary to the federal ones. The article then examines the German Court's last decision on sovereign bonds to compare the underlying factors that facilitates European judicial defiance with those contributing to occasional state legislator resistance in the US. Comparison to the highly centralized US shows that defiance of supremacy cannot be eliminated, but its conducive factors can be controlled to ensure a functioning constitutional system. To do so, attention must be paid to popular, fiscal and political factors, rather than to exclusively legalistic ones.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"28 1","pages":"834 - 855"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On sovereign bonds and marijuana: Comparing supremacy limits in the US and the EU\",\"authors\":\"M. Moussa\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1023263X211048603\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Against the background of the PSPP judgement, the article conducts an under-researched comparison of the German Court's recent judgement with incidents of defiance from American states’ legislatures. Particularly, it highlights the example of marijuana laws in the US where a handful of states managed to legislate de facto governing norms contrary to the federal ones. The article then examines the German Court's last decision on sovereign bonds to compare the underlying factors that facilitates European judicial defiance with those contributing to occasional state legislator resistance in the US. Comparison to the highly centralized US shows that defiance of supremacy cannot be eliminated, but its conducive factors can be controlled to ensure a functioning constitutional system. To do so, attention must be paid to popular, fiscal and political factors, rather than to exclusively legalistic ones.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"834 - 855\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211048603\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211048603","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在PSPP判决的背景下,本文对德国法院最近的判决与美国各州立法机构的蔑视事件进行了深入研究的比较。特别是,它突出了美国大麻法律的例子,少数几个州设法立法制定了与联邦法律相反的事实上的管理规范。然后,本文考察了德国法院对主权债券的最后裁决,以比较促成欧洲司法蔑视的潜在因素与促成美国州立法者偶尔抵制的潜在因素。与高度集权的美国相比,对霸权的蔑视无法消除,但可以控制其有利因素,以确保宪法制度的运作。为此,必须注意民众、财政和政治因素,而不是只注意法律因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On sovereign bonds and marijuana: Comparing supremacy limits in the US and the EU
Against the background of the PSPP judgement, the article conducts an under-researched comparison of the German Court's recent judgement with incidents of defiance from American states’ legislatures. Particularly, it highlights the example of marijuana laws in the US where a handful of states managed to legislate de facto governing norms contrary to the federal ones. The article then examines the German Court's last decision on sovereign bonds to compare the underlying factors that facilitates European judicial defiance with those contributing to occasional state legislator resistance in the US. Comparison to the highly centralized US shows that defiance of supremacy cannot be eliminated, but its conducive factors can be controlled to ensure a functioning constitutional system. To do so, attention must be paid to popular, fiscal and political factors, rather than to exclusively legalistic ones.
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
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