ScholarLens Back to search
2014•SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Constitutional Reasoning in the Israeli Supreme Court

Suzie Navot

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This article deals with the context and methods of constitutional reasoning developed by the Israeli Supreme Court in 40 “leading cases”. It analyses the caracteristics and types of arguments in constitutional reasoning; the judicial rethorics; the use of precedents, foreign law and kew concepts; and discusses the conclusions from a comparative perspective. This work has been developed within the CONREASON Project, hosted by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg (Germany) and by the Institute for Legal Studies of the Centre for Social Sciences at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest (Hungary), coordinated by Andras Jakab, Arthur Dyevre and Giulio Itzcovich.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article deals with the context and methods of constitutional reasoning developed by the Israeli Supreme Court in 40 “leading cases”. It analyses the caracteristics and types of arguments in constitutional reasoning; the judicial rethorics; the use of precedents, foreign law and kew concepts; and discusses the conclusions from a comparative perspective. This work has been developed within the CONREASON Project, hosted by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg (Germany) and by the Institute for Legal Studies of the Centre for Social Sciences at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest (Hungary), coordinated by Andras Jakab, Arthur Dyevre and Giulio Itzcovich.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

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 deals with the context and methods of constitutional reasoning developed by the Israeli Supreme Court in 40 “leading cases”. It analyses the caracteristics and types of arguments in constitutional reasoning; the judicial rethorics; the use of precedents, foreign law and kew concepts; and discusses the conclusions from a comparative perspective. This work has been developed within the CONREASON Project, hosted by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg (Germany) and by the Institute for Legal Studies of the Centre for Social Sciences at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest (Hungary), coordinated by Andras Jakab, Arthur Dyevre and Giulio Itzcovich.

Key concepts: Supreme court, Law, Political science, Context (archaeology), Constitutional law, Constitutional court, Perspective (graphical), Comparative law

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Constitutional Reasoning in the Israeli Supreme Court — Research Paper | ScholarLens