"We the people", "They the people" e o Enigma do Constitucionalismo Democrático
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21875/tjc.v2i1.12744Palabras clave:
Tradução, Translation, Português, Portuguese, Constitucionalismo democrático, Democratic Constitutionalism, David StraussResumen
RESUMO:
Tradução do artigo "We the people, They the people, and the puzzle of democratic constitutionalism"
ABSTRACT:
Portuguese version of "We the people, They the people, and the puzzle of democratic constitutionalism"
Citas
ACKERMAN, Bruce. We The People: Foundations. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1991.
ACKERMAN, Bruce. We The People: Transformations. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1998.
ACKERMAN, Bruce. The Storrs Lectures: Discovering the Constitution, Yale Law Journal, vol. 93, p. 1013-1072, 1984.
BALKIN, Jack M. Living Originalism. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2011.
BARRON, David J.; LEDERMAN, Martin S. The Commander in Chief at the Lowest Ebb—A Constitutional History, Harvard Law Review, v. 121, p. 941, 2008.
BICKEL, Alexander M. The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962.
BREST, Paul. The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding. Boston University Law Review, v. 60, p. 204-205, 1980.
CARDOZO, Benjamin N. Adherence to Precedent. The Subconscious Element in the Judicial Process, The nature of the Judicial Process. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1921.
ELSTER, Jon. The Optimal Design of a Constituent Assembly. In: LANDEMORE ,Hélène; ELSTER, Jon (eds.). Collective Wisdom: Principles and Mechanisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
ESKRIDGE, William N. Jr; FEREJOHN, John. Constitutional Horticulture: Deliberation-Respecting Judicial Review, Texas Law Review, v. 87, p. 1273 e 1281. 2009.
FALLÓN Jr., Richard H. A Constructivist Coherence Theory of Constitutional Interpretation. Harvard Law Review, v. 100, p. 1189 e 1195, 1987.
FLEMING, James E. Toward a More Democratic Congress? Boston University Law Review, v. 89, p. 629 e 640. 2009.
FRIEDMAN, Barry. The Will Of The People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced The Supreme Court And Shaped The Meaning Of The Constitution. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 2009.
GILLMAN, Howard. Party Politics and Constitutional Change: The Political Origins of Liberal Judicial Activism. In: KAHN, Ronald; KERSH, Ken I. (Eds). The Supreme Court And American Political Development. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2006.
HAMILTON, MADISON, JAY. O Federalista. Portugal: Ed. Calouste Gulbekian, 2011.
KLARMAN, Michael J. Constitutional Fact/Constitutional Fiction: A Critique of Bruce Ackerman's Theory of Constitutional Moments, Stanford Law Review, v. 44, p. 759 e 765, 1992.
KRAMER, Larry. What's a Constitution For Anyway? Of History and Theory, Bruce Ackerman and The New Deal, Case Western Reserve Law Review, v. 46, p. 885 e 921, 1996.
LAIN, Corinna Barret. Upside-Down Judicial Review, The Georgetown Law Journal, v. 101, p. 113, 2012.
LEVINSON, Sanford. Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where The Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We The People Can Correct It). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
OGLETREE JR., Charles J. From Dred Scott to Barack Obama: The Ebb and Flow of Race Jurisprudence, Harvard Blackletter Law Journal, v. 25, 2009.
PILDES, Richard H. Is the Supreme Court a "Majoritarian" Institution? The Supreme Court Review, v. 2010, p. 103 e 105. 2011.
RAWLS, John. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005.
REHFELD, Andrew. Representation Rethought: On Trustees, Delegates, and Gyroscopes in the Study of Political Representation and Democracy, AM. POL. SCl. REV, v. 103, p. 214. 2009.
ROSEN, Jeffrey. The Most Democratic Branch: How The Courts Serve America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
SHOWRONEK, Stephen. Building A New American State: The Expansion Of National Administrative Capacities 1877-1920. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
SIEGEL, Reva B. She The People: The Nineteenth Amendment, Sex Equality, Federalism, and the Family, Harvard Law Review, v. 115, 2002.
SIMON, Larry G. The Authority of the Framers of the Constitution: Can Originalist Interpretation Be Justified? California Law Review, v. 73, p. 1482; 1498; 1499-1500. 1985.
STRAUSS, David A. Common law Constitutional Interpretation. U. Chicago Law Review, v. 63, p. 877, 1996.
STRAUSS, David A. Freedom of Speech and the Common-Law Constitution. In: STONE, Geoffrey R.; BOLLINGER, Lee C (Eds). Eternally Vigilant: Free Speech In The Modern Era. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2002.
STRAUSS, David A. The living constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
SUAREZ, Ray. Interview by Ray Suarez with Elzena Johnson, Delegate to the 2012 Democratic Nat'l Convention, in Charlotte, N.C. (Sept. 6, 2012). Disponível em < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbk5NsA3Cyw>. Acesso em: 06 set. 2017.
US CONSTITUTION, 1787.
US OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL. Lawfubess of Recess Appointments During a Recess of the Senate Notwithstanding Periodic Pro Forma Sessions. Opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel, Vol. 36, p. 5-9, 2012. Disponível em: <http://justice.gov/olc/20l2/pro-fonna-sessions-opinion.pdf>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207, 1215-19 (2011). Disponível em: <https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/562/443/>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. Citizens United v. FEC, 130 S. Ct. 876, 913 (2010). Disponível em: <https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf.>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 602, 605 (2000). Disponível em: <https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/529/598/case.html>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. Noel Canning v. NLRB, 705 F.3d 490, 499-507 (D.C. Cir. 2013). Disponível em: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/12-1281>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. Evans v. Stephens, 387 F.3d 1220, 1224-26 (11th Cir. 2004). Disponível em: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-828.ZA.html>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). Disponível em: <https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/347/483/>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
US SUPREME COURT. United States v. Carolene Products Co. 304 U.S. 144 (1938). Disponível em: <https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/304/144/case.html>. Acesso em: 02 set. 2017.
WHITTINGTON, Keith E. Constitutional Interpretation: Textual Meaning, Original Intent, and Judicial Review. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con las siguientes condiciones:
- Los autores mantienen los derechos de autor y conceden a la revista el derecho de primera publicación, estando el trabajo simultáneamente bajo la Licencia de Atribución de Creative Commons que permite compartir el trabajo con el reconocimiento de la autoría y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Los autores pueden asumir contratos adicionales por separado, para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicada en esta revista (por ejemplo, publicando en un repositorio institucional o como capítulo de un libro), con el reconocimiento de la autoría y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y se anima a los autores a publicar y distribuir su trabajo en línea (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o como página personal) en cualquier momento antes o durante el proceso editorial, ya que esto puede generar cambios productivos, así como aumentar el impacto y la citación del trabajo publicado (Véase El efecto del acceso abierto).
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Brasil.
