domingo, 29 de agosto de 2010

Interpretación Constitucional algunas novedades

La confirmación de Elena Kagan trajo de nuevo algunas notas interesantes sobre interpretación constitucional y la -verdadera- labor de los jueces constitucionales. Encontré varias notas interesantes, no puedo pegarlas todas en el Blog de manera que aquí una listita de ellas:

--> The Temptation of Elena Kagan by Ronald Dworkin

"However there is a genuine and important countervailing argument. It is crucial to the role Supreme Court justices play in our constitutional system that they be free and able to reject popular opinion—to overrule the wishes of the majority in order to protect individual rights. The individual rights that need protection are often unpopular; it would compromise that crucial role were the public able to defeat a nominee because he or she proposed to defend such rights. It seems doubtful, for instance, that anyone who declared a concern to protect due process rights of suspected terrorists, or to better protect the rights of women to choose abortion, or to recognize a constitutional right to gay marriage could be nominated now or, if he were, escape a filibuster or outright defeat. So if nominees were as candid as Kagan proposed in 1995, and senators approved only those with very popular opinions, Americans might lose their traditional protection against majority selfishness, intolerance, or prejudice." ~Ronald Dworkin

--> How Judges Think? Richard Posner

--> Commencement Speech at Harvard by David Souter

--> David Souter finally tells Americans to grow up Comentario al Speech de Souter por Dahlia Lithwick

--> Etiqueta Ronald Dworkin en este Blog

--> Sección Jurisprudence de la revista Slate

0 comentarios:

Publicar un comentario

Related Posts with Thumbnails