TY - CHAP
T1 - Proportionality, Judicial Review, and Global Constitutionalism
AU - Sweet, Alec Stone
AU - Mathews, Jud
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2009, Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - Over the past fifty years, proportionality analysis (PA) has widely diffused. It is today an overarching principle of constitutional adjudication, the preferred procedure for managing disputes involving an alleged conflict between two rights claims, or between a rights provision and a legitimate state or public interest. With the consolidation of the “new constitutionalism,”1 this type of dispute has come to dominate the dockets of constitutional and supreme courts around the world. Although other modes of rights adjudication were available and could have been chosen and developed, PA emerged as a multi-purpose, best-practice, standard.
AB - Over the past fifty years, proportionality analysis (PA) has widely diffused. It is today an overarching principle of constitutional adjudication, the preferred procedure for managing disputes involving an alleged conflict between two rights claims, or between a rights provision and a legitimate state or public interest. With the consolidation of the “new constitutionalism,”1 this type of dispute has come to dominate the dockets of constitutional and supreme courts around the world. Although other modes of rights adjudication were available and could have been chosen and developed, PA emerged as a multi-purpose, best-practice, standard.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85125805775
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85125805775#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1007/978-1-4020-8500-0_9
DO - 10.1007/978-1-4020-8500-0_9
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:85125805775
T3 - Law and Philosophy Library
SP - 171
EP - 214
BT - Law and Philosophy Library
PB - Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
ER -