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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

How do Brazilian Supreme Court Justices use the decision-making strategy of judicial self-restraint? Judicial self-restraint is a strategy whose fundamental premise sustain that, if possible, any Supreme Court should avoid ruling on constitutional issues, and resolve the cases before them on other (usually statutory) grounds to avoid the hard constitutional questions that would come with the other interpretation. When asked to decide on the constitutionality of homeschooling plans (RE888815), the Brazilian Supreme Court Justices entered a debate involving various aspects of the educational public policy cycle, moving away from the strictly constitutional issue. This research qualitatively analyzed this case, notably through content analysis tools, to verify how the judicial self-restraint strategy was used in the judgment of a relevant educational public policy issue.

Brazilian Supreme Court, judicial self-restraint, and educational policy: the homeschooling case (RE 888815)