Law and Philosophy 22 (s 3-4):247-276 (2003)

Abstract
This paper investigates the accusation that judicial review is undemocratic. It argues that the alleged tension between judicial review and democracy fails to account for the fact that the content of rights and their scope depends on societal convictions and moral judgments of the public. Such dependence suggests that rights-based judicial review can be described as an alternative form of democratic participation
Keywords Law   Logic   Philosophy of Law   Law Theory/Law Philosophy   Political Science   Social Issues
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1023/A:1024505219735
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,316
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Philosophy 63 (243):119-122.
Reminder.[author unknown] - 1973 - The Owl of Minerva 5 (2):1-1.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Is Judicial Review Democratic? A Comment on Harel.Larry Alexander - 2003 - Law and Philosophy 22 (s 3-4):277-283.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
49 ( #233,102 of 2,519,441 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #407,861 of 2,519,441 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes