Judicial Review in Review: A Four-Part Defense of Legal Constitutionalism - A Review Essay on Political Constitutionalism, by Richard Bellamy
Alec Douglas Walen
Abstract
Alec Douglas Walen
Abstract
This review focuses on the powerful critique of judicial review published in 2007 by Richard Bellamy. It responds to his central theses, drawing in significant part from the work of Mattias Kumm and, at the same time, offering a novel defense of constitutionalism and judicial review. This defense argues that certain of the costs of judicial review are worth bearing in order to keep alive the lessons of history embodied in constitutions, lest future generations forget history and, thereby, prove doomed to repeat it.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This review focuses on the powerful critique of judicial review published in 2007 by Richard Bellamy. It responds to his central theses, drawing in significant part from the work of Mattias Kumm and, at the same time, offering a novel defense of constitutionalism and judicial review. This defense argues that certain of the costs of judicial review are worth bearing in order to keep alive the lessons of history embodied in constitutions, lest future generations forget history and, thereby, prove doomed to repeat it.
Key concepts: Constitutionalism, Judicial review, Politics, Law, Political science, Embodied cognition, Order (exchange), Judicial activism