2011•International Journal of Constitutional LawOpen access

Political constitutionalism and the judicial role: A response

Paul Craig

Open full text 14 citations

Abstract

This article considers arguments advanced by political constitutionalists concerning judicial review of the kind commonly associated with administrative law. Political constitutionalists have hitherto been critical of particular judicial decisions, but have not proffered any coherent theory as to the scope and nature of such judicial review. The article begins by considering four challenges that must be met by a political constitutionalist who wishes to confine administrative law judicial review. The focus then shifts to the work of Adam Tomkins, who is to be credited for articulating a political constitutionalist thesis as to the scope of judicial review. It is, however, argued in the remainder of the article that this thesis is neither coherent nor consistent.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article considers arguments advanced by political constitutionalists concerning judicial review of the kind commonly associated with administrative law. Political constitutionalists have hitherto been critical of particular judicial decisions, but have not proffered any coherent theory as to the scope and nature of such judicial review. The article begins by considering four challenges that must be met by a political constitutionalist who wishes to confine administrative law judicial review. The focus then shifts to the work of Adam Tomkins, who is to be credited for articulating a political constitutionalist thesis as to the scope of judicial review. It is, however, argued in the remainder of the article that this thesis is neither coherent nor consistent.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article considers arguments advanced by political constitutionalists concerning judicial review of the kind commonly associated with administrative law. Political constitutionalists have hitherto been critical of particular judicial decisions, but have not proffered any coherent theory as to the scope and nature of such judicial review. The article begins by considering four challenges that must be met by a political constitutionalist who wishes to confine administrative law judicial review. The focus then shifts to the work of Adam Tomkins, who is to be credited for articulating a political constitutionalist thesis as to the scope of judicial review. It is, however, argued in the remainder of the article that this thesis is neither coherent nor consistent.

Key concepts: Constitutionalism, Judicial review, Scope (computer science), Politics, Judicial activism, Law and economics, Law, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Political constitutionalism and the judicial role: A response — Research Paper | ScholarLens