Rights-based judicial review: A democratic justification

Alon Harel

doi:10.1023/A:1024505219735

Rights-based judicial review: A democratic justification

Alon Harel^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Law

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

27 Scopus citations

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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	247-276
Number of pages	30
Journal	Law and Philosophy
Volume	22
Issue number	3-4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024505219735
State	Published - Jul 2003

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Access to Document

10.1023/A:1024505219735

Cite this

@article{be10a7ebc24c4ad5b3039286eee5179f,

title = "Rights-based judicial review: A democratic justification",

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.",

author = "Alon Harel",

year = "2003",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1023/A:1024505219735",

language = "אנגלית",

volume = "22",

pages = "247--276",

journal = "Law and Philosophy",

issn = "0167-5249",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "3-4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rights-based judicial review

T2 - A democratic justification

AU - Harel, Alon

PY - 2003/7

Y1 - 2003/7

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0347301541

U2 - 10.1023/A:1024505219735

DO - 10.1023/A:1024505219735

M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.systematicreview???

AN - SCOPUS:0347301541

SN - 0167-5249

VL - 22

SP - 247

EP - 276

JO - Law and Philosophy

JF - Law and Philosophy

IS - 3-4

ER -

Rights-based judicial review: A democratic justification

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this