JUDICIAL REVIEW AS CONTESTATION – FORMS AND JUSTIFICATIONS

This panel considers theoretical justifications for the institution of judicial review as democratic contestation, as well as the forms of judicial review that those justifications might suggest. The papers are connected by their apparent reliance on non-epistemic justifications; that is, justifications that recognize that judges have neither abnormal moral insight nor abnormal capacity to reason...

Panel 119, WEDNESDAY JUNE 27 2018 9:00 AM - 10:30 AM

INSTITUTIONAL FAILURE IN COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

This panel investigates the role that institutional failure performs in comparative constitutional law. It interrogates the concept’s meaning, the ways in which it manifests in practice, and its consequences for particular claims in constitutional theory. The papers examine, in particular, (a) the role of regional human rights bodies in addressing institutional failure at the national...

Panel 8, MONDAY 25 June 2018 16:45-18:15