Digital Commons Network^™

Delegation At The Founding, Julian Davis Mortenson, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

This article refutes the claim that the Constitution was originally understood to contain a nondelegation doctrine. The founding generation didn’t share anything remotely approaching a belief that the constitutional settlement imposed restrictions on the delegation of legislative power---let alone by empowering the judiciary to police legalized limits. To the contrary, the overwhelming majority of Founders didn’t see anything wrong with delegations as a matter of legal theory. The formal account just wasn’t that complicated: Any particular use of coercive rulemaking authority could readily be characterized as the exercise of either executive or legislative power, and was thus formally valid regardless …

The People Against The Constitution, Aziz Z. Huq

Michigan Law Review

A review of Jan-Werner Müller, What Is Populism?.

Inferiorizing Judicial Review: Popular Constitutionalism In Trial Courts, Ori Aronson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The ongoing debates over the legitimacy of judicial review-the power of courts to strike down unconstitutional statutes-as well as the evolving school of thought called "popular constitutionalism, " are characterized by a preoccupation with the Supreme Court as the embodiment of judicial power This is a striking shortcoming in prevailing constitutional theory, given the fact that in the United States, inferior courts engage in constitutional adjudication and in acts of judicial review on a daily basis, in ways that are importantly different from the familiar practices of the Supreme Court. The Article breaks down this monolithic concept of "the courts" …

Takeover: German Reunification Under A Magnifying Glass, Mathias Reimann

Michigan Law Review

My first personal experience with the unification of my home country was an unlikely encounter in an unlikely place. In July 1990, I was strolling across the Ponte Vecchio in Florence when I saw something so bizarre that it stopped me in my tracks. At the southern end of the bridge, deep in the pedestrian zone - off limits to automobiles - and right in the middle of the tourist crowd, was a lonely car, occupied by four obviously disoriented people. It was not just any car but a small, drab, and amusingly antiquated vehicle puffing bluish smoke from a …

Striking The Rock: Confronting Gender Equality In South Africa, Penelope E. Andrews

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

This Article analyzes the status of women's rights in the newly democratic South Africa. It examines rights guaranteed in the Constitution and conflicts between the principle of gender equality and the recognition of indigenous law and institutions. The Article focuses on the South African transition to democracy and the influence that feminist agitation at the international level has had on South African women's attempts at political organization. After dissecting the historical position of customary law in South Africa and questioning its place in the new democratic regime. The author argues that, although South African women have benefited from the global …

A Job For The Judges: The Judiciary And The Constitution In A Massive And Complex Society, Neil K. Komesar

Michigan Law Review

This article attempts that task by exploring the elements of institutional choice in constitutional law. Part I takes an overview of the general division of decisionmaking responsibility between the political processes and the courts. It also examines the failures of existing theories to take account of this division of responsibility. Part II identifies two theories of political malfunction - those circumstances in which political processes are subject to significant doubt or distrust and, therefore, prime candidates for judicial review. Part III examines the characteristics - limits, biases, and abilities - of the judiciary and the potential for judicial response to …

Towards A United Kingdom Bill Of Rights, Francis G. Jacobs

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

The United Kingdom has no fundamental constitutional instrument. It is in that respect almost unique. Instead it has a fundamental constitutional doctrine: the doctrine of the sovereignty of Parliament. The first paradox of the United Kingdom constitution is that no rules have a constitutional status.

The doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty entails that all the constitutional rules that, in other countries, would be set out in a constitution are, in the United Kingdom, contained in Acts of Parliament-or in the common law, or in unwritten constitutional conventions or custom; and that any such rules, whether statutory or not, can be repealed …

Rights And Judges In A Democracy: A New Canadian Version, Paul C. Weiler

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Canadians sought a constitutionally entrenched Charter of Rights not just for its own sake, but also as part of a larger effort at constitutional renewal. The hope was that such a Charter would preserve a united Canada in the face of the serious threat posed by French Canadian nationalism within a potentially independent Quebec. In this Article, I comment on those features of the Canadian debate and its denouement that are noteworthy within the Canadian context, as well as those that illustrate some of the universal themes of constitutional theory.

Cappellitti: Judicial Review In The Contemporary World, Paul G. Kauper

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Judicial Review in the Contemporary World by Mauro Cappellitti