Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Where Our Protection LiesSeparation of Powers and Constitutional Review$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Dimitrios Kyritsis

Print publication date: 2017

Print ISBN-13: 9780199672257

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2017

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199672257.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 17 June 2021

A Little Less Conversation, a Little More Action

A Little Less Conversation, a Little More Action

Chapter:
(p.101) 5 A Little Less Conversation, a Little More Action
Source:
Where Our Protection Lies
Author(s):

Dimitrios Kyritsis

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/oso/9780199672257.003.0005

This chapter criticizes constitutional dialogue theories, which treat constitutional review as an iteration in a dialogic process. Such theories are often invoked to explain the moral appeal of so-called weak constitutional review, which reserves the ‘last word’ on constitutional matters for the legislature. It is argued that constitutional dialogue theories stress the discursive element of judicial decisions at the expense of their authoritative impact and thus cannot adequately account for the limits we tend to impose on the courts’ reviewing power. More fundamentally, they overlook that political orders are not there to discover moral truth. First and foremost, they go well when they do not wrong us. Accordingly, constitutional review is not judged primarily by its discursive value, its ability to enhance public—and more specifically legislative—deliberation, but rather by its ability to thwart infringements of our fundamental rights.

Keywords:   constitutional dialogue, weak constitutional review, legislative override, declaration of incompatibility, rights-consistent interpretation, authoritativeness, finality, discursive impact

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .