An Uncommon Court: How the High Court of Australia Has Undermined Australian Federalism
Sydney Law Review, Vol. 30, pp. 245-294, 2008
University of Queensland TC Beirne School of Law Research Paper No. 08-05
50 Pages Posted: 9 Jun 2008
Abstract
The authors contend that Australia's High Court, in deciding federal distribution of powers cases over the last century, has created an end product that looks like one of A P Herbert's Uncommon Law mock hypothetical cases. These were sustained parodies of common law reasoning in which each step in the fictional judge's train of thought followed plausibly from what went before. And yet from such unexceptionable starting points the conclusions reached were ridiculous. The same general sort of analysis is here applied to the High Court's federalism jurisprudence, the fit being a surprisingly good one.
Keywords: federalism, federal powers, state powers, constitutional interpretation, Australia, High Court of Australia, Herbert, Engineers Case
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
By Barry Friedman and Scott Smith
-
By Caleb Nelson
-
By Thomas Colby and Peter J. Smith
-
A Constitutional 'Work in Progress'? The Charter and the Limits of Progressive Interpretation
-
Beguiled by Metaphors: The 'Living Tree' and Originalist Constitutional Interpretation in Canada
-
Why Originalism Won't Die - Common Mistakes in Competing Theories of Judicial Interpretation
-
The Curious Concept of the 'Living Tree' (or Non-Locked-In) Constitution
By James Allan
-
By Jamal Greene