Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Procedural Review And Substantive Review: Can The Two Be Combined? Towards A Semiprocedural Model In Israel ביקורת שיפוטית תוכנית וביקורת שיפוטית הליכית: הילכו שניים יחדיו? לקראת מודל סמי-פרוצדורלי בישראל, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
The Role Of Courts In Improving The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
The Role Of Courts In Improving The Legislative Process, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Semiprocedural Judicial Review, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Semiprocedural Judicial Review, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
This Article explores a novel cross-national phenomenon: the emergence of a new judicial review model that merges procedural judicial review with substantive judicial review. While this model is not yet fully defined, it has already spurred much controversy. The Article explicates this emerging model, which it terms 'semiprocedural review,' and provides a theoretical exploration of both its justifications and its objectionable aspects. It concludes by evaluating semiprocedural review's overall justifiability and suggesting guiding principles for a more legitimate model of semiprocedural review. The Article pursues these goals through the unique perspective of juxtaposing semiprocedural review with 'pure procedural judicial review' …
Legislative Supremacy In The United States?: Rethinking The Enrolled Bill Doctrine, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Legislative Supremacy In The United States?: Rethinking The Enrolled Bill Doctrine, Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov
This Article revisits the “enrolled bill” doctrine which requires courts to accept the signatures of the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate on the “enrolled bill” as unimpeachable evidence that a bill has been constitutionally enacted. It argues that this time-honored doctrine has far-reaching ramifications that were largely overlooked in existing discussions. In addition to reexamining the soundness of this doctrine’s main rationales, the Article introduces two major novel arguments against the doctrine. First, it argues that the doctrine amounts to an impermissible delegation of both judicial and lawmaking powers to the legislative officers of Congress. Second, …