Explore the vast range of titles available.

This collection is the most comprehensive account of the Fundamental Law and its underlying principles. The objective is to analyze this constitutional transition from the perspectives of comparative constitutional law, legal theory and political philosophy. The authors outline and analyze how the current constitutional changes are altering the basic structure of the Hungarian State. The key concepts of the theoretical inquiry are sociological and normative legitimacy, majoritarian and partnership approach to democracy, procedural and substantive elements of constitutionalism. Changes are also examined in the field of human rights, focusing on the principles of equality, dignity, and civil liberties.

New approaches to governance have attracted significant scholarly attention in recent years. Commentators on both sides of the Atlantic have identified, charted and evaluated the rise and spread of forms of governance, forms which seem to differ from previous regulatory and legal paradigms. In Europe, the emergence of the Open Method of Coordination has provided a focal point for new governance studies.

This book examines the \"constitutional faith\" that has, since 1788, been a central component of American \"civil religion.\" By taking seriously the parallel between wholehearted acceptance of the Constitution and religious faith, Sanford Levinson opens up a host of intriguing questions about what it means to be American. While some view the Constitution as the central component of an American religion that serves to unite the social order, Levinson maintains that its sacred role can result in conflict, fragmentation, and even war. To Levinson, the Constitution's value lies in the realm of the discourse it sustains: a uniquely American form of political rhetoric that allows citizens to grapple with every important public issue imaginable. In a new afterword, Levinson looks at the deepening of constitutional worship and attributes the current widespread frustrations with the government to the static nature of the Constitution.

Constitutional pluralism has become immensely popular among scholars who study European integration and issues of global governance. Some of them believe that constitutionalism, traditionally thought to be bound to a nation state, can emerge beyond state borders–most importantly in the process of European integration, but also beyond that, for example, in international regulatory regimes such as the WTO, or international systems of fundamental rights protection, such as the European Convention. At the same time, the idea of constitutional pluralism has not gone unchallenged. Some have questioned its compatibility with the very nature of law and the values which law brings to constitutionalism. The critiques have come from both sides: from those who believe in the ‘traditional’ European constitutionalism based on a hierarchically superior authority of the European Union as well as from scholars focusing on constitutions of particular states. The book collects contributions taking opposing perspectives on constitutional pluralism–some defending and promoting the concept of constitutional pluralism, some criticising and opposing it. While some authors can be called ‘the founding fathers of constitutional pluralism’, others are young academics who have recently entered the field. Together they offer fresh perspectives on both theoretical and practical aspects of constitutional pluralism, enriching our existing understanding of the concept in current scholarship.

This authoritative study considers all aspects of the European Union's distinctive constitution since its inception. A unique political animal, the EU has given rise to important constitutional conundrums and paradoxes that John Erik Fossum and Agustín José Menéndez explore in detail. The authors consider the process of forging the EU's constitution and the set of fundamental norms that define the institutional structure, the decision-making procedures, and the foundations of the Union's democratic legitimacy. Their analysis illuminates the distinctive features of the EU's pluralist constitutional construct but also the interesting parallels to the Canadian constitutional experience and provides the tools to understand the Union's development, especially during the Laeken (2001–2005) and Lisbon (2007–2009) processes of constitutional reform. The authors' original theory of constitutional synthesis captures the distinctive traits of the European Union as a polity. It explains why and how the European Communities were established as the first constitutional union of constitutional states wherein integration would be steered by law, not power politics or imperialism. Similarly, it presents the European Union as one of the few examples of a polity that has transcended the paradigm of the nation-state (and perhaps even that of the state). Locating the substance and process of Lisbon in its proper constitutional context, Fossum and Menéndez explain why this should be seen as a new beginning of the Union's constitutional season, not its end. Offering the first history of European constitutional law that is both theoretically informed and normatively grounded, their book will be essential reading for all readers interested in the process and theory of European integration.

Judicial review by constitutional courts is often presented as a necessary supplement to democracy. This book questions its effectiveness and legitimacy. Drawing on the republican tradition, Richard Bellamy argues that the democratic mechanisms of open elections between competing parties and decision-making by majority rule offer superior and sufficient methods for upholding rights and the rule of law. The absence of popular accountability renders judicial review a form of arbitrary rule which lacks the incentive structure democracy provides to ensure rulers treat the ruled with equal concern and respect. Rights based judicial review undermines the constitutionality of democracy. Its counter-majoritarian bias promotes privileged against unprivileged minorities, while its legalism and focus on individual cases distort public debate. Rather than constraining democracy with written constitutions and greater judicial oversight, attention should be paid to improving democratic processes through such measures as reformed electoral systems and enhanced parliamentary scrutiny.

In Constitutional Culture, Independence, and Rights , Javier García Oliva and Helen Hall coin the term constitutional culture to encapsulate the collective rules and expectations that govern the collective life within a jurisdiction. Significantly, these shared norms have both legal and social elements, including matters as diverse as standards of parenting, the modus operandi of police officers, and taboos around sexuality. Using Quebec, Scotland, and Catalonia as case studies, the book delves into what these constitutional battles mean for the rights, identity, and needs of everyday people, and it powerfully demonstrates why the hypothetical future independence of these regions would have far-reaching practical consequences, beyond the realm of political structures and academic theory. The book does not present a magic bullet to resolve debates around independence – this is not its purpose, and the text in fact demonstrates why there is no objectively optimal approach in any or all contexts. Instead, it seeks to shed light on aspects of these situations often overlooked in discussions around the fate of nations, and it addresses what the consequences of constitutional paradigm shifts might be for individuals. Constitutional culture is a complex web of interconnected understandings and behaviours, and the vibrations from shaking or cutting a fundamental strand will be felt throughout the structure.

The last fifty years has seen a worldwide trend toward constitutional democracy. But can constitutionalism become truly global? Relying on historical examples of successfully implanted constitutional regimes, ranging from the older experiences in the United States and France to the relatively recent ones in Germany, Spain and South Africa, Michel Rosenfeld sheds light on the range of conditions necessary for the emergence, continuity and adaptability of a viable constitutional identity - citizenship, nationalism, multiculturalism, and human rights being important elements. The Identity of the Constitutional Subject is the first systematic analysis of the concept, drawing on philosophy, psychoanalysis, political theory and law from a comparative perspective to explore the relationship between the ideal of constitutionalism and the need to construct a common constitutional identity that is distinct from national, cultural, ethnic or religious identity. The Identity of the Constitutional Subject will be of interest to students and scholars in law, legal and political philosophy, political science, multicultural studies, international relations and US politics. \" The Identity of the Constitutional Subject is a book of breadth, depth and impressive learning. It sets a new standard in comparative constitutional analysis.\" - Joseph Weiler, University Professor and Joseph Straus Professor, New York University School of Law \"When the Constitution \"speaks\", who is actually speaking? And to whom? What about? These old questions are treated by Michel Rosenfeld in an exciting and refreshingly novel way. Using his formidable philosophical and comparative-constitutional expertise, oscillating effortlessly between legal systems as different as the United States and France, Spain and Hungary; referring to thinkers as different as Freud and Rawls, Lacan and Rousseau – Rosenfeld has offered a profound and powerful analysis of \"the constitutional subject\" that will become essential reading for all those dealing with constitutional theory, comparative law, and political philosophy.\" - Wojciech Sadurski, Challis Professor of Jurisprudence, The University of Sydney \"The challenge of pluralism, writes Michel Rosenfeld, is to forge a political structure held together by a fixed set of norms while leaving room for an accommodation with those who do not accept those norms. The promise and the difficulties of this necessary project are the subjects of Rosenfeld’s magisterial synthesis of political, psychological, theological and theoretical perspectives on the subject of constitutionalism. The result is a trenchant and historically nuanced exploration of issues no one and no nation can afford to ignore.\" – Stanley Fish, Professor of Law, Florida International University \"Michel Rosenfeld has written a provocative and erudite exploration of paradoxes of identity, national and constitutional.　 Informed by his wide knowledge of constitutionalism around the world, the book offers an account of the different ways in which a nation whose population changes over time can have an enduring national identity and how those different ways can be tied to different forms of national constitutions which do not change over time. As with all important contributions to constitutional theory, not all readers will agree with Professor Rosenfeld's arguments, but the field will surely benefit from his work.\" – Mark Tushnet, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Harvard Law School Introduction Part 1: Why Constitutional Identity and for Whom? 1. The Constitutional Subject: Singular, Plural or Universal? 2. The Constitutional Subject and the Clash of Self and Other: On the Uses of Negation, Metaphor and Metonymy Part 2: Producing Constitutional Identity 3. Reinventing Tradition through Constitutional Interpretation: The Case of Unremunerated Rights in the United States 4. Recasting and Reorienting Identity through Constitution-Making: The Pivotal Case of Spain’s 1978 Constitution Part 3: Constitutional Identity as Bridge Between Self and Other: Binding Together Citizenship, History and Society 5. Constitutional Models: Shaping, Nurturing and Guiding the Constitutional Subject 6. Models of Constitution Making 7. The Constitutional Subject and Clashing Visions of Citizenship: Can We be Beyond what We are Not? 8. Can the Constitutional Subject go Global? Imagining a Convergence of the Universal, the Particular and the Singular Michel Rosenfeld is Justice Sydney L. Robins Professor of Human Rights, at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. Rosenfeld teaches and is widely published in the fields of American and comparative constitutional law and legal philosophy. His books include Affirmative Action and Justice: A Philosophical and Constitutional Inquiry (1991); Just Interpretations: Law Between Ethics and Politics (1998); and Comparative Constitutionalism: Cases and Materials (2003).

Constitutionalism is steadily becoming the prevalent form of governance in Africa. But how does constitutionalism deal with the lingering effects of colonialism? And how does constitutional law deal with Islamic principles in the region?African Constitutionalism and the Role of Islamseeks to answer these questions. Constitutional governance has not been, nor will be, easily achieved, Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im argues. But setbacks and difficulties are to be expected in the process of adaptation and indigenization of an essentially alien concept-that of of nation-state-and its role in large-scale political and social organization. An-Na'im discusses the problems of implementing constitutionalized forms of government specific to Africa, from definitional to conceptual and practical issues. The role of Islam in these endeavors is open to challenge and reformulation, and should not be taken for granted or assumed to be necessarily negative or positive, An-Na'im asserts, and he emphasizes the role of the agency of Muslims in the process of adapting constitutionalism to the values and practices of their own societies. By examining the incremental successes that some African nations have already achieved and An-Na'im reveals the contingent role that Islam has to play in this process. Ultimately, these issues will determine the long-term sustainability of constitutionalism in Africa.

Proportionality, accepted as a general principle of constitutional law by many countries, requires that government intrusions on freedoms be justified, that greater intrusions have stronger justifications, and that punishments reflect the relative severity of the offense. Proportionality as a doctrine developed by courts, as in Canada, has provided a stable methodological framework, promoting structured, transparent decisions even about closely contested constitutional values. Other benefits of proportionality include its potential to bring constitutional law closer to constitutional justice, to provide a common discourse about rights for all branches of government, and to help identify the kinds of failures in democratic process warranting heightened judicial scrutiny. Earlier U.S. debates over \"balancing\" were not informed by recent comparative experience with structured proportionality doctrine and its benefits. Many areas of U.S. constitutional law include some elements of what is elsewhere called proportionality analysis. I argue here for greater use of proportionality principles and doctrine; I also argue that proportionality review is not the answer to all constitutional rights questions. Free speech can benefit from categorical presumptions, but in their application and design proportionality may be relevant. The Fourth Amendment, which secures a \"right\" against \"unreasonable searches and seizures,\" is replete with categorical rules protecting police conduct from judicial review; more case-by-case analysis of the \"unreasonableness\" or disproportionality of police conduct would better protect rights and the rule of law. \"Disparate impact\" equality claims might be better addressed through more proportionate review standards; Eighth Amendment review of prison sentences would benefit from more use of proportionality principles. Recognizing proportionality's advantages, and limits, would better enable U.S. constitutional law to at once protect rights and facilitate effective democratic self-governance.