English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

El trabajo discute algunos aspectos de la legitimidad de la supremacia judicial desde un punto de vista historico y normativo. Adicionalmente, reflexiona sobre las teorias politico-constitucionales conocidas como departamentalismo y constitucionalismo popular. A continuacion, enuncia y descarta como validos diversos argumentos practicos y normativos que defienden la supremacia judicial, es decir, el caracter final con que los tribunales controlan normas emanadas de otros poderes del Estado. Finalmente, nos valdremos de la distincion entre republicanismo y liberalismo para argumentar que la unica justificacion de la supremacia judicial puede proveerla una comprension liberal e instrumental de la democracia, la cual consideramos insuficiente desde una perspectiva republicana y deliberativa. Palabras clave: constitucionalismo, revision judicial, supremacia judicial, departamentalismo, democracia deliberativa. Abstract The essay discusses some aspects of the legitimacy of the idea of judicial supremacy from a historical and a normative viewpoint. Additionally, it reflects upon the political and constitutional theories known as departmentalism and popular constitutionalism. It further describes and discard the validity of several practical and abstract arguments that champion judicial supremacy, i.e. the finality with which courts of law control norms enacted by other branches of government. Finally, we use the distinction between republicanism and liberalism to argue that the justification of judicial supremacy can only be provided by a liberal and instrumental comprehension of democracy, which is an insufficient justification from a republican and deliberative perspective. Keywords: constitutionalism, judicial review, judicial supremacy, departmentalism, deliberative democracy.

bajo palabra

Revisión judicial y democracia deliberativa en términos de teoría departamental y constitucionalismo popular / Judicial Review and Deliberative Democracy in terms of Departmentalism and Popular Constitutionalism