Judicial review and institutional balance
Dimitrios Kyritsis has provided us with a marvelously interesting theory of the legitimacy of judicial review. In this paper, I juxtapose my own theory of judicial review against Kyritsis’ in order to develop a precise picture of where we agree and disagree, thus providing a basis for further fruitf...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/revus, |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Sprache: | Anglais |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Revus
2019
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Zusammenfassung: | Dimitrios Kyritsis has provided us with a marvelously interesting theory of the legitimacy of judicial review. In this paper, I juxtapose my own theory of judicial review against Kyritsis’ in order to develop a precise picture of where we agree and disagree, thus providing a basis for further fruitful discussion. To do so, I briefly summarize Kyritsis’ theory, limiting my summary to those parts relevant for my discussion. I then lay out my own theory of institutional practical concordance that can be applied to the problem of judicial review. The third section collects some common ground between our theories, while the fourth section briefly lists a couple of minor differences and problems. In the fifth section, I engage with what I think is the most important difference between our theories, namely the choice between a combination model or a separation model. |
|---|