Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1345348
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (90)



 


 



A Democratic Defense of Constitutional Balancing


Stephen Gardbaum


University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law


Law & Ethics of Human Rights, Vol. 4, 2010
UCLA School of Law Research Paper No. 09-09

Abstract:     
We all live in the age of constitutional balancing. Abstracting away differences of nuance and doctrinal detail, balancing is a common feature of the structure of rights analysis across contemporary constitutional systems. Indeed, abstracting just a little further still, balancing is an inherent part of the near-universal general conception of a constitutional right as an important prima facie claim that nonetheless can, in principle, be limited or overridden by non-constitutional rights claims premised on conflicting public policy objectives.

It is not surprising, then, that a significant literature about constitutional balancing has developed at both domestic and comparative levels. What is surprising is that so little of this literature has attempted to present the normative case for constitutional balancing or the general structure of rights analysis of which it is an inherent part. Rather, the existing scholarship has mostly focused on five other tasks: (1) describing and comparing first-order practices of balancing; (2) providing second-order conceptual analyses or "rational reconstructions" of balancing and/or the general structure of rights; (3) explaining how and why balancing has become dominant; (4) advancing critiques of balancing; and (5) attempting to rebut certain parts of these critiques.

In this paper, I present one particular affirmative justification of constitutional balancing; namely, a democratic justification. I argue that balancing appropriately bolsters the role of majoritarian decision-making about rights within a system of constitutional democracy. It thereby renders entrenched rights enforced by the power of judicial review more consistent with certain enduring democratic concerns. I also explain the implications of this justification of constitutional balancing for how courts should exercise their powers of review.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 36

Keywords: balancing, proportionality, constitutional rights, comparative constitutional law

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 19, 2009 ; Last revised: September 9, 2009

Suggested Citation

Gardbaum, Stephen, A Democratic Defense of Constitutional Balancing. Law & Ethics of Human Rights, Vol. 4, 2010; UCLA School of Law Research Paper No. 09-09. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1345348

Contact Information

Stephen Gardbaum (Contact Author)
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law ( email )
385 Charles E. Young Dr. East
Room 1242
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1476
United States
310 206-5206 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,280
Downloads: 391
Download Rank: 41,029
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  90

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.421 seconds