Deliberative Democracy and the Institutions of Judicial Review

Author: Christopher F. Zurn;  

Publisher: Cambridge University Press‎

Publication year: 2007

E-ISBN: 9781316974766

P-ISBN(Paperback): 9780521867344

P-ISBN(Hardback):  9780521867344

Subject: B0 Philosophical Theory;D0 Political Theory

Keyword: 政治理论

Language: ENG

Access to resources Favorite

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Description

Zurn examines the legitimacy of constitutional review using a normative theory of deliberative democratic constitutionalism. Christopher F. Zurn shows why a normative theory of deliberative democratic constitutionalism yields the best understanding of the legitimacy of constitutional review. He further argues that this function should be institutionalized in a complex, multi-location structure including not only independent constitutional courts, but also legislative and executive self-review. Christopher F. Zurn shows why a normative theory of deliberative democratic constitutionalism yields the best understanding of the legitimacy of constitutional review. He further argues that this function should be institutionalized in a complex, multi-location structure including not only independent constitutional courts, but also legislative and executive self-review. In this book, Christopher F. Zurn shows why a normative theory of deliberative democratic constitutionalism yields the best understanding of the legitimacy of constitutional review. He further argues that this function should be institutionalized in a complex, multi-location structure including not only independent constitutional courts but also legislative and executive self-review that would enable interbranch constitutional dialogue and constitutional amendment through deliberative civic constitutional forums. Drawing on sustained critical analyses of diverse pluralist and deliberative democratic arguments concerning the legitimacy of judicial review, Zurn concludes that constitutional review is necessary to ensure the procedural requirements for legitimate democratic self-rule through deliberative cooperation. Claiming that pure normative theory is not sufficient to settle issues of institutional design, Zurn draws on empirical and comparative research to propose reformed institutions of constitutional review that encourage the development of fundamental law as an ongoing project of democratic deliberation and decision. Part I. Introduction: 1. An old chestnut is actually two; 2. Pathologies of ad hoc triangulation; 3. Functions and institutions; Part II. Majoritarian Democracy and Minoritarian Constitutionalism: 4. Judicial review as substantially legitimate protection of minority rights; 5. Judicial review as procedurally legitimate protection of democracy; 6. Moving beyond aggregative majoritarianism and minoritarian constitutionalism; Part III. From Majoritarian to Deliberative Theories of Constitutional Democracy: 7. Deliberative democracy: four axes of analysis; 8. Constitutionalism: four central elements; 9. Constitutional democracy?; Part IV. Deliberative Democracy and Substantive Constitutionalism: 10. Keepers of the substantive flame of American exceptionalism; 11. Guardians of the moral law in the forum of principle; 12. Are substantialist defenses of judicial review self-defeating?; Part V. Disagreement and the Constitution of Democracy: 13. Democratic precommitment to judicial review: Freeman; 14. Deliberative majoritarianism and the paternalism of judicial review: Waldron; 15. Upshot: we need a theory of democratic constitutionalism; Part VI. The Seducements of Juristic Discourse as Democratic Deliberation: 16. A division of labor between juristic deliberation and populist aggregation?; 17. Actual juristic discourse in the United States system of constitutional adjudication; 18. Legal principles and moral-political reasoning; Part VII. Constitutionalism as the Pr

Chapter

2. Function vs. Institution: Constitutional vs. Judicial Review

2 Majoritarian Democracy and Minoritarian Constitutionalism

A. Judicial Review as Substantially Legitimate Protection of Minority Rights

1. Judicial Review as the Protector of Values: Bickel

2. Judicial Review as the Protector of Minority Rights: Choper

B. Judicial Review as Procedurally Legitimate Protection of Democracy

1. Procedural Referees of the Political Marketplace: Ely

2. Judicial Review as Quasi Guardianship: Dahl

C. Moving beyond Aggregative Majoritarianism and Minoritarian Constitutionalism

3 From Majoritarian to Deliberative Theories of Constitutional Democracy

A. Deliberative Democracy: four axes of analysis

1. Democratic Process: Aggregation vs. Deliberation

2. Legitimacy of Political Outcomes: Substantialism vs. Proceduralism

3. Democratic Worth of Political Institutions: Instrumental vs. Intrinsic

4. Accountability of Power: Populist vs. Expertocratic

B. Constitutionalism: four central elements

1. Rule of Law

2. Higher vs. Ordinary Law, Entrenchment

3. Political Structuration

3. Rights: Private vs. Public Autonomy

C. Constitutional Democracy?

4 Deliberative Democracy and Substantive Constitutionalism

A. Keepers of the Substantive Flame of American Exceptionalism

1. Perry's Theory of Judicial Review

2. A Constricted Account of Public Reason

B. Guardians of the Moral Law in the Forum of Principle

1. Dworkin's Theory of Judicial Review

2. Institutional Design and Moral Competences

C. Are Substantialist Defenses of Judicial Review Self-Defeating?

1. Waldron's Rights-Based Argument against a Bill of Rights

2. Limitations of Waldron's Argument

5 Disagreement and the Constitution of Democracy

A. Democratic Precommitment to Judicial Review: Freeman

1. Precommitment as an Act of Popular Sovereignty

2. Institutionalization, Disagreement, and Ongoing Democracy

B. Deliberative Majoritarianism and the Paternalism of Judicial Review: waldron

1. Deliberative Majoritarianism and the Argument against Judicial Review

2. Fairness, Majoritarianism, and Democratic Legitimacy

4. Distortions in Democratic Processes of Representation

C. Upshot: We Need a Theory of Democratic Constitutionalism

6 The Seducements of Juristic Discourse as Democratic Deliberation

A. A Division of Labor between Juristic Deliberation and Populist Aggregation?

1. The Juridical Exemplification of Public Reason: Rawls

2. The Juridical Representation of the People's Moral Reason: Eisgruber

3. Juridical Communication with the People in Moral-Political Reason: Michelman

4 The Wide Influence of the Seducements of Judicial Discourse

B. Actual Juristic Discourse in the United States System of Constitutional Adjudication

1. Framing the Inquiry

2. Four Examples

a. Freedom of Religion and the Pledge of Allegiance

b. Criminal Punishment: "Three Strikes" sentencing

c. Individual Liberty: Physician Assisted Suicide and Homosexual Sex

d. Electoral Equality and the Redistricting Revolution

C. Legal Principles and Moral-Political Reasoning

1. The Institutional Determinants of Legalism in the U.S. Practice of Judicial Review

2. Would a Kelsen-style Court do Better?

3. Legal Principles as Derivative Moral-Political Principles

7 Constitutionalism as the Procedural Structuring of Deliberative Democracy

A. A Provisional Summary: criteria for an adequate theory of constitutional review

B. Guardians of the Conditions of Procedural Legitimacy: habermas

1. Habermas on Democratic Legitimacy

2. Justifying the Function of Constitutional Review

3. Habermas on Democratic Process

4. A Judicial Institutionalization of Constitutional Review?

8 The Institutions of Constitutional Review I Design Problems and Judicial Review

A. The Problems of Designing Institutions of Constitutional Review

1. Tensions between the Ideal and the Real

2. Design Proposals and Assessment Values

B. Independent Constitutional Courts in a Concentrated Review System

1. Structural Independence

2. The Use of Juridical Techniques

3. Specialization in a Concentrated Review System

4. Jurisdiction and Referral Modalities

5. Assessment

9 The Institutions of Constitutional Review II Horizontal Dispersal and Vertical Empowerment

A. Self-Review Panels in the Legislature and Regulatory Agencies

B. Mechanisms for Interbranch Debate and Decisional Dispersal

C. Easing Formal Amendability Requirements

D. Establishing Civic Constitutional Fora

Bibliography

Index

Table of Cases

The users who browse this book also browse