Reversing: Undoing Bad Laws and Bad Judicial Decisions

THE AMERICAN ILLNESS: ESSAYS ON THE RULE OF LAW, Yale University Press, Forthcoming

George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 12-18

29 Pages Posted: 20 Feb 2012  

F. H. Buckley

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty

Date Written: February 20, 2012

Abstract

The growth of laws and judicial decisions of questionable economic benefit, and the current debt crisis, pose the question of how bad choices can be reversed. That problem is prominently on display in southern Europe, and indeed throughout much of the first world. Parliamentary systems seem better able to undo bad laws than the U.S. presidential system, with its separation of powers, which does not augur well for America. Bad judicial decisions might be even harder to reverse, because of the conservatism of judges who follow precedent. However, judicial elections in the states appear to offer a solution to the problem. The objections which have been raised against such elections seem less than compelling.

Keywords: American Revolution, Canada, comparative, confederation, constitutional, Disraeli, framers, Gladstone, governance, Great Britain, legislative reform, Loyalists, merit selection, monarchical, populist, pre-enactment screening, presidential, Reform Act, Republican, reversibility, Walter Bagehot

JEL Classification: D72, H11, H77

Suggested Citation

Buckley, F. H., Reversing: Undoing Bad Laws and Bad Judicial Decisions (February 20, 2012). THE AMERICAN ILLNESS: ESSAYS ON THE RULE OF LAW, Yale University Press, Forthcoming; George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 12-18. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2008305

Francis (Frank) H. Buckley (Contact Author)

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty ( email )

3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States
703-993-8028 (Phone)
703-993-8088 (Fax)

Paper statistics

Downloads
44
Abstract Views
892