Continuing the Conversation: A Reply to Manfredi and Kelly

14 Pages Posted: 27 May 2008 Last revised: 11 Sep 2017

See all articles by Sujit Choudhry

Sujit Choudhry

Center for Constitutional Transitions; Center for Global Constitutionalism, WZB Berlin Social Science Center

Abstract

In this reply, the authors assert that Professors Manfredi and Kelly's response to their original article either misses the point or is simply mistaken. The authors clarify the limited purpose of their original study, which was to assess the extent to which the Supreme Court is counter-majoritarian under the Charter. Manfredi and Kelly's interpretation of the available data either relies on inappropriate quantitative measures or draws overly fine distinctions between highly variable data sets. The burden of proof is on those who allege that the Court is engaged in judicial activism, and Manfredi and Kelly have not succeeded in demonstrating that the null hypothesis has been disproved.

Suggested Citation

Choudhry, Sujit, Continuing the Conversation: A Reply to Manfredi and Kelly. McGill Law Journal, Vol. 49, No. 3, 2004. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1137711

Sujit Choudhry (Contact Author)

Center for Constitutional Transitions ( email )

HOME PAGE: constitutionaltransitions.org

Center for Global Constitutionalism, WZB Berlin Social Science Center ( email )

Reichpietschufer 50
D-10785 Berlin, 10785
Germany

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
43
Abstract Views
689
PlumX Metrics