最高法院与宪法

Dickson Brice
{"title":"最高法院与宪法","authors":"Dickson Brice","doi":"10.1093/LAW/9780198793731.003.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses first on the power of the President of Ireland to refer draft Bills to the Supreme Court for review under Article 26 of the Constitution. It analyses the most recent instances of this practice and queries whether the ‘one judgment’ rule and the ‘immutability’ rule (whereby a decision that a Bill is constitutional can never again be challenged in court) are necessary or desirable. The chapter then looks at how the Supreme Court has—or has not—extended the reach of constitutionalism into the realm of socio-economic rights, in particular in situations where the expenditure of public money is a key issue. This moves into a section on unenumerated rights and the natural law theory of rights. The chapter acknowledges that significant steps have been taken by the Supreme Court to develop the 1937 Constitution but suggests that significant opportunities to do more have been missed.","PeriodicalId":251482,"journal":{"name":"The Irish Supreme Court","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"6 The Supreme Court and the Constitution\",\"authors\":\"Dickson Brice\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/LAW/9780198793731.003.0006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter focuses first on the power of the President of Ireland to refer draft Bills to the Supreme Court for review under Article 26 of the Constitution. It analyses the most recent instances of this practice and queries whether the ‘one judgment’ rule and the ‘immutability’ rule (whereby a decision that a Bill is constitutional can never again be challenged in court) are necessary or desirable. The chapter then looks at how the Supreme Court has—or has not—extended the reach of constitutionalism into the realm of socio-economic rights, in particular in situations where the expenditure of public money is a key issue. This moves into a section on unenumerated rights and the natural law theory of rights. The chapter acknowledges that significant steps have been taken by the Supreme Court to develop the 1937 Constitution but suggests that significant opportunities to do more have been missed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":251482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Irish Supreme Court\",\"volume\":\"75 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Irish Supreme Court\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/LAW/9780198793731.003.0006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Irish Supreme Court","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LAW/9780198793731.003.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章首先着重讨论爱尔兰总统根据《宪法》第26条将法案草案提交最高法院审查的权力。它分析了这种做法的最新实例,并质疑“一次判决”规则和“不变性”规则(即法案符合宪法的决定不能再在法庭上受到质疑)是否必要或可取。然后,本章探讨了最高法院是如何将宪政的范围扩展到社会经济权利领域的,特别是在公共资金支出是关键问题的情况下。接下来是关于未列举权利和自然法权利理论的一节。这一章承认,最高法院在制定1937年宪法方面已经采取了重要步骤,但同时也指出,错过了做更多事情的重要机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
6 The Supreme Court and the Constitution
This chapter focuses first on the power of the President of Ireland to refer draft Bills to the Supreme Court for review under Article 26 of the Constitution. It analyses the most recent instances of this practice and queries whether the ‘one judgment’ rule and the ‘immutability’ rule (whereby a decision that a Bill is constitutional can never again be challenged in court) are necessary or desirable. The chapter then looks at how the Supreme Court has—or has not—extended the reach of constitutionalism into the realm of socio-economic rights, in particular in situations where the expenditure of public money is a key issue. This moves into a section on unenumerated rights and the natural law theory of rights. The chapter acknowledges that significant steps have been taken by the Supreme Court to develop the 1937 Constitution but suggests that significant opportunities to do more have been missed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
7 The Supreme Court and Northern Ireland 13 Conclusion 11 The Supreme Court and the European Union 8 Administrative Law 4 The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1