Theories of constitutional interpretation in the United States of America

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The article substantiates the judgment that in relation to that in relation to the theories of constitutional interpretation in the United States, paradigms constructed according to the type of binary opposition (originalism –the concept of natural law), are clearly insufficient. Therefore, private legal theories, which are theories of constitutional interpretation of the United States, should take into account the basic principles and institutions, doctrines of the branch of Constitutional Law of the United States: the concept of a “living constitution”, the theory of judicial precedent, procedural aspects of Constitutional Law, structuralist theories.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Leonid G. Berlyavsky

Rostov State University of Economics “RINH”; Don State Technical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: berlg@yandex.ru

PhD in Law, Doctor of History, Professor of Law Faculty, Constitutional and Municipal Law Department, Professor 

Russian Federation, Rostov-on-Don; Rostov-on-Don

References

  1. Alexi R. The existence of human rights // Jurisprudence. 2011. No. 4. P. 22 (in Russ.).
  2. Berlyavsky L. G. Concept of the “living constitution” in the United States of America // Constitutional and Municipal Law. 2014. No. 2. P. 17 (in Russ.).
  3. Vlasikhin V. A., Mishin A. A. Constitution of the USA: politico-legal comment. M., 1985. Pp. 39, 242, 244 (in Russ.).
  4. History: in 4 vols. Vol. 3 / res. ed. G. N. Sevostyanov. M., 1985. Pp. 21, 22 (in Russ.).
  5. Klenner G. From the law of nature to the nature of law. M., 1988. P. 10 (in Russ.).
  6. Cross R. Precedent in English law / transl. from English. M., 1985 (in Russ.).
  7. Lafitsky V. I. Constitutional system of the United States of America. M., 2007. Pp. 101, 151, 152 (in Russ.).
  8. Lafitsky V. I. Comparative jurisprudence in the formation of rights. M., 2010. Vol. 1. Pp. 371, 372 (in Russ.).
  9. Lobov M. The U. S. Supreme Court and the problem of divided power: the ultimate legal approach // Constitutional Law: European perspective. 2004. No. 2. P. 80 (in Russ.).
  10. Makarenko V. P. Analytic Philosophy of Law: concepts and problem. 2002. No. 6. Pp. 10–33 (in Russ.).
  11. Machin I. F. History political and legal scholar. M., 2007. P. 198 (in Russ.).
  12. Ogleznev V. V., Surovtsev V. A. Analytic philosophy, juridical language and philosophy of rights. Tomsk, 2016 (in Russ.).
  13. Petrova E. A. Status and precedent in the Eastern American law system. M., 2007. Pp. 64, 71, 73, 101 (in Russ.).
  14. Polyakov A. V., Timoshina E. V. General theory of law. SPb., 2005. Pp. 39–41 (in Russ.).
  15. Safonov V. N. Constitutional law-making in the activities of the U. S. Supreme Court. Historical and legal research. M., 2018. Pp. 105, 106, 108–111, 151–156 (in Russ.).
  16. Smetannikov D. S. School of critical jurisprudence and research: abstract … PhD in Law. SPb., 2000 (in Russ.).
  17. Tashnet M. Co-operation has a lot of control over the rule of law and so much legal primacy in the “horizontal effect” // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2006. No. 2. P. 31 (in Russ.).
  18. Tonkov E. N. English doctrine so much law: history and time: abstract … PhD in Law. M., 2013 (in Russ.).
  19. Filippov S. V. The US judicial system. M., 1980. P. 4 (in Russ.).
  20. Hart G. L.A. Philosophy and the language of law. M., 2017 (in Russ.).
  21. Chestnov I. L. Postclassical theory of rights. SPb., 2012 (in Russ.).
  22. Chetvernin V. Russian constitutional concept spelling // Constitutional Law: a strict European review. 2003. No. 4. P. 28 (in Russ.).
  23. Chudakov M. F. Constitutional Law in the United States. The main institutions. Minsk, 2003. Pp. 119, 120 (in Russ.).
  24. Straus L. Natural law and history. M., 2007. Pp. 8, 9 (in Russ.).
  25. Yarkova E. N. History and methodology legal Sciences. Tomsk, 2012. Pp. 251, 255 (in Russ.).
  26. Arthur Selwyn Miller. Notes on the Concept of the “Living” Constitution. GEO. WASH. L. REV. 1963. Vol. 31. Pp. 881, 884.
  27. Balkin Jack M. Framework Originalism and the Living Constitution (October 23, 2008) // Northwestern University Law Review, 2009. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1290869 (accessed: 08.08.2023).
  28. Barnett Randy. Restoring the Lost Constitution (Princeton U. Press 2013). P. 95.
  29. Benjamin N. Cardoso. The Nature of the Judical Process. 1921. P. 17, cited in: Morton J. Horwitz. Foreword: The Constitution of Change: Legal Fundamentality Without Fundamentalism, HARV. L. REV. 1993. Vol. 107. P. 54.
  30. Bickel A. (1962). The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. Indianapolis, Ind.
  31. Bobbs-Merrill; Ely, J.H. (1980). Democracy and Distrust. Cambridge, Mass.; Tushnet. M., 1988.
  32. Bruce Ackerman. The Living Constitution // Harvard Law Review. 2007. No. 7. Pp. 1748, 1752, 1754, 1756, 1796, 1797, 1801.
  33. Charles Beard. The Living Constitution, 185 ANNALS AM. ACAD. POL. & SOC. SCI. 29, 31 (1936).
  34. Chemerinsky E. 1) Two Cheers for State Constitutional Law // Stanford Law Review. 62 (2010). Pp. 1695–1710; 2) The Assault on the Constitution: Executive Power and the War on Terrorism // Davis Law Review. 40 (2006). Pp. 2–20; 3) Real Discrimination? // Journal of Law & Policy. 16 (2004). Pp. 97–127.
  35. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution / ed. by Leonard W. Levy and Kenneth Karst. 2nd ed. / Adam Winkler, associate editor for the second edition. NY, 2000. Pp. 655–657, 1632, 1633.
  36. Fallon R. A Constructivist Coherence Theory of Constitutional Interpretation // 100 Harvard Law Rev. No. 6 (1987). Pp. 1189, 1190.
  37. Gerard J. Clark. An Introduction to Constitutional Interpretation // Suffolk University Law School Faculty Publications. 2002. No. 1. Pp. 2–10.
  38. Howard Gillman. Political Development and the Origins of the “Living Constitution” // American Constitution Society (ACS). September 2007. P. 6.
  39. Howard Gillman. The Collapse of Constitutional Originalism, 11 STUD. AM. POL. DEV. 191, 215 (1997).
  40. Jack M. Balkin. The Roots of the Living Constitution // Boston University Law Review, 92 (2012). Pp. 1129–1160.
  41. James B. Thayer. The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law, 7 HARV. L. REV. 129 (1893).
  42. John E. Finn (2006). Part I: Lecture 4: The Court and Constitutional Interpretation. Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights. The Teaching Company. Pp. 52–54.
  43. Keeping faith with the Сonstitution / Goodwin L., Karlan P., Schroeder C. NY, Wash., 2009. P. 25.
  44. Keith E. Whittington. It’s Alive! The Persistence of the Constitution, 11 GOOD SOC’Y8, 9 (2002).
  45. Kenneth R. Thomas. Selected Theories of Constitutional Interpretation // Congressional Research Service. February 15, 2011. Pp. 4–8.
  46. Morton J. Horwitz. Foreword: The Constitution of Change: Legal Fundamentality Without Fundamentalism, 107 HARV. L. REV. 54 (1993).
  47. Murrill B. J. (2018). Modes of Constitutional Interpretation (CRS Report No. R45129). Congressional Research Service. Pp. 3, 5–24.
  48. Murrill B. J. (2018). The Supreme Court’s Overruling of Constitutional Precedent (CRS Report No. R45319). Congressional Research Service. Pp. 27–50.
  49. Otis H. Stephens, John M. Scheb. American Constitutional Law. Vol. 1. Sources of Power and Restraint. Belmont, 2008. Pp. 47–49.
  50. Pestritto Ronald J. (2005). Woodrow Wilson: The Essential Political Writings. P. 121.
  51. Scalia Antonin. A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law. Princeton University Press, 1998. P. 144.
  52. Schultz D. A. Encyclopedia of the United States Constitution. NY, 2009. Pp. 379, 380.
  53. Strauss D. A. Common Law Constitutional Interpretation // The University of Chicago Law Review. No. 63 (1996). Pp. 877–935.
  54. Timothy Sandefur. Clarence Thomas’s Jurisprudence Unexplained // New York University Journal of Law & Liberty 4 (2009). P. 555.
  55. Tushnet M. (1988). Red, White, and Blue: A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Law. Cambridge, Mass.
  56. Ward Ian. An introduction to legal theory. London, 1998.
  57. Wilson Woodrow. (1908) Constitutional Government in the United States. P. 57.
  58. Winkler Adam. A Revolution Too Soon: Woman Suffragists and the “Living Constitution”. 76 NYULR1456, 1463.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences