|
|
| |
Home >
UK & USA >
Deliberative Democracy and the Institutions of Judicial Review

|
Deliberative Democracy and the Institutions of Judicial Review
By
Christopher F. Zurn
Description
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, multilocation 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.
• Thorough survey of different
accounts of judicial review put forward by deliberative democratic
theorists • Proposes innovative institutional reforms for the
system of constitutional elaboration in constitutional democracies •
Integrates research from political philosophy, jurisprudence,
comparative political science of institutions, and legal studies
Contents
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 Procedural Structuring of Deliberative Democracy: 19. A
provisional summary: criteria for an adequate theory of
constitutional review; 20. Guardians of the conditions of procedural
legitimacy: Habermas; Part VIII. The Institutions of Constitutional
Review I: Design Problems and Judicial Review: 21. The problems of
designing institutions of constitutional review; 22. Independent
constitutional courts in a concentrated review system; Part IX. The
Institutions of Constitutional Review II: Horizontal Dispersal and
Vertical Empowerment: 23. Self-review panels in the legislature and
regulatory agencies; 24. Mechanisms for inter-branch debate and
decisional dispersal; 25. Easing formal amendability requirements;
26. Establishing civic constitutional fora.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|