The New Prussian Constitution

1922 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-665
Author(s):  
Walter James Shepard
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Sharp Contrast ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
German Empire ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Comparative Constitutional Law ◽  
Frame Work ◽  
Moderate Length ◽  
American State

To the student of comparative constitutional law the new Prussian constitution of November 30, 1920, is of scarcely less interest than that of the reconstituted German Empire itself. In sharp contrast to American state constitutions, the instrument is of moderate length, about four thousand words, and is limited to the bare outlines of a frame-work of government. All doctrinaire elements are lacking. There is even no bill of rights.

State Constitutional Law in 1935–36

1936 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 692-712
Author(s):  
J. A. C. Grant
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
Fundamental Law ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
National Constitution ◽  
State Constitutional Law ◽  
American State

There is a kernel of truth in Chief Justice Hughes' remark that “we are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” To realize its full significance, “constitution” must be written in the plural. We have forty-nine courts of last resort, each interpreting the fundamental law of its own jurisdiction. The essential similarity of our state constitutions, and of our state bills of rights to that of the national constitution, together with the tendency of common law courts to follow each other's decisions, lend an element of stability to American state constitutional law that otherwise would be lacking. At the same time, even within so short a period as a year, the interplay of personalities may be seen moulding new doctrines in particular jurisdictions, which doctrines take on added significance because of the realization that they may, in time, serve as a basis for redirecting the course of constitutional development in other jurisdictions as well.

Constituting Scotland

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Elliot Bulmer
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Constitutional Theory ◽  
Constitutional Design ◽  
Global Trends ◽  
National Movement ◽  
Comparative Constitutional Law ◽  
Constitutional Thought ◽  
Scottish Government ◽  
Historical Trajectory ◽  
Constitutional Tradition

The rise of the Scottish national movement has been accompanied by the emergence of distinct constitutional ideas, claims and arguments, which may affect constitutional design in any future independent Scotland. Drawing on the fields of constitutional theory, comparative constitutional law, and Scottish studies, this book examines the historical trajectory of the constitutional question in Scotland and analyses the influences and constraints on the constitutional imagination of the Scottish national movement, in terms of both the national and international contexts. It identifies an emerging Scottish nationalist constitutional tradition that is distinct from British constitutional orthodoxies but nevertheless corresponds to broad global trends in constitutional thought and design. Much of the book is devoted to the detailed exposition and comparative analysis of the draft constitution for an independent Scotland published by the SNP in 2002. The 2014 draft interim Constitution presented by the Scottish Government is also examined, and the two texts are contrasted to show the changing nature of the SNP’s constitutional policy: from liberal-procedural constitutionalism in pursuit of a more inclusive polity, to a more populist and majoritarian constitutionalism.

The judicial review of legality

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie R. Davidson ◽  
Leora Bilsky
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
New Model ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Comparative Constitutional Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Relationship Of

In comparative constitutional law, the various models of judicial review require courts to examine either the substantive content of legislation or the procedure through which legislation was passed. This article offers a new model of judicial review – ‘the judicial review of legality’ – in which courts review instead the forms of law. The forms of law are the ways in which law communicates its norms to the persons who are meant to comply with them, and they include generality, clarity, avoidance of contradiction, and non-retroactivity. Drawing on recent writing on the jurisprudence of Lon Fuller, this article argues that Fuller’s linking of the forms of law to a relationship of reciprocity between government and governed can ground judicial review and that such review provides a missing language to address important legislative pathologies. Moreover, through an analysis of recent developments in Israel, the article demonstrates that the judicial review of legality targets some of the key legal techniques of contemporary processes of democratic erosion which other models of judicial review struggle to address, all the while re-centring judicial review on the lawyer’s craftsmanship and thus reducing problems of court legitimacy. This article therefore offers a distinctive and normatively appealing way for courts to act in troubling times.

State Constitutional Law in 1929–1930

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 666-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver P. Field
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
State Courts ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Course Of Action ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Constitutional Law

State courts determine, in the absence of constitutional provision to the contrary, whether amendments to state constitutions have been proposed and adopted in the manner provided for these constitutions. Not every minor deviation from the course of action marked out in the constitution for its amendment is deemed sufficient to justify the court in declaring that the amendment has been “unconstitutionally adopted,” but whether these deviations are serious enough to warrant such a declaration is a question to be determined by the courts themselves. Statutes supplementing constitutional provisions on the subject of amendment are valid if not in conflict with the constitutional provisions themselves, and substantial compliance with these rules is also required by the courts. Sometimes the provisions regulating the subject of publication of proposed amendments are constitutional; at other times they are statutory. In either case, publication in the manner provided for, and for the period of time provided for, is necessary to the validity of the amendment. Publication for two weeks, when the period should have been four weeks, was deemed sufficient by the Nebraska court to invalidate the amendment involved.

scholarly journals Public Participation in African Constitutionalism

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Werner Menski
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Comparative Constitutional Law ◽  
Responsible Governance ◽  
Constitution Making

This review explores why public participation in constitution-making matters for cultivating responsible governance and for fine-tuning justice, focused on immensely rich African evidence within a broader comparative constitutional law context.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document