投票权棘轮:罗诉选举专员案

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Public Law Review Pub Date : 2011-09-12 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.1926493
Graeme Orr
{"title":"投票权棘轮:罗诉选举专员案","authors":"Graeme Orr","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1926493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Rowe v Electoral Commissioner, the Australian High Court struck down an early cut-off date for voter registration. This commentary situates the decision in the history of the electoral writ and roll closure, and parses the various judgments from an election law perspective. The Court’s decision is not a radical one, but an example of the recent flowering of constitutionalism in electoral law, since the Court recognised an implied universal suffrage in the Australian Constitution. The case represents, like the prisoner voting case of Roach before it, an example of constitutional ratcheting, informed by an underlying conceit that the court is merely protecting against legislative back-sliding, rather than offering a litigational sword to those who want to expand the franchise and political rights.","PeriodicalId":43092,"journal":{"name":"Public Law Review","volume":"30 1","pages":"83-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2011-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Voting Rights Ratchet: Rowe v. Electoral Commissioner\",\"authors\":\"Graeme Orr\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1926493\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Rowe v Electoral Commissioner, the Australian High Court struck down an early cut-off date for voter registration. This commentary situates the decision in the history of the electoral writ and roll closure, and parses the various judgments from an election law perspective. The Court’s decision is not a radical one, but an example of the recent flowering of constitutionalism in electoral law, since the Court recognised an implied universal suffrage in the Australian Constitution. The case represents, like the prisoner voting case of Roach before it, an example of constitutional ratcheting, informed by an underlying conceit that the court is merely protecting against legislative back-sliding, rather than offering a litigational sword to those who want to expand the franchise and political rights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Law Review\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"83-89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1926493\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1926493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在Rowe诉选举专员案中,澳大利亚高等法院推翻了选民登记提前截止日期的规定。本文将这一判决置于选举令状和卷封的历史中,并从选举法的角度对各种判决进行分析。法院的决定并不激进,而是最近选举法中宪政主义开花结果的一个例子,因为法院承认澳大利亚宪法中隐含的普选权。就像之前罗奇(Roach)的囚犯投票案一样,这个案子代表了宪法限制的一个例子,它被一种潜在的自负所影响,即法院只是在防止立法倒退,而不是向那些想要扩大选举权和政治权利的人提供一把诉讼之剑。
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
The Voting Rights Ratchet: Rowe v. Electoral Commissioner
In Rowe v Electoral Commissioner, the Australian High Court struck down an early cut-off date for voter registration. This commentary situates the decision in the history of the electoral writ and roll closure, and parses the various judgments from an election law perspective. The Court’s decision is not a radical one, but an example of the recent flowering of constitutionalism in electoral law, since the Court recognised an implied universal suffrage in the Australian Constitution. The case represents, like the prisoner voting case of Roach before it, an example of constitutional ratcheting, informed by an underlying conceit that the court is merely protecting against legislative back-sliding, rather than offering a litigational sword to those who want to expand the franchise and political rights.
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
Impairment and Limited State Immunity Parliamentary Appointment or Popular Election? Breaking the Impasse on Models for an Australian 'Westminster Republic' The Constitution of the Environmental Emergency Limited Leverage: Federal Remedies and Policing Reform The Voting Rights Ratchet: Rowe v. Electoral Commissioner
×
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