About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

20 B. C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 123 (1997)
Judicial Review: The United States Supreme Court Versus the German Constitutional Court

handle is hein.journals/bcic20 and id is 131 raw text is: Judicial Review: The United States Supreme Court Versus the German Constitutional Court INTRODUCTION Judicial review is the means by which a court determines the accept- ability of a given law or other official action on grounds of compatibility with constitutional forms.' The German Constitutional Court (Consti- tutional Court) and the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) differ significantly, and this disparity is most evident in their respective roles of judicial review. Since the nature and scope of judi- cial review inevitably varies from one system to another, a comparative framework must allow for all pertinent distinctions.2 This framework includes an examination of the interpretive tasks faced by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court in the context of their relations with other domestic political institutions.3 Such an examination re- quires an evaluation of the actual political characteristics and practices of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court and of the domes- tic institutions to which these courts are related.4 The ability of each of these Courts to interpret and develop their respective constitutions, and thus to utilize judicial review, depends on certain factors inherent in a comparative analysis.5 First, the extent of the Court's own jurisdiction is important in this determination.6 Sec- ond, the doctrines and attitudes concerning judicial decisions over certain kinds of political questions have implications on the roles of the Courts.7 Third, the Courts are affected by the prevailing philosophy I See C. Neal Tate, Comparative Judicial Review and Public Policy: Concepts and Overview, in COMPARATIVEJUDICIAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC POLICY 3,4 (Donald W.Jackson & C. Neal Tate eds., 1992). 2See Donald W. Jackson, Original Intent, Strict Construction, andJudicial Review: A Framework for Comparative Analysis, in COMPARATIVEJUDICIAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC POLICY, supra note 1, at 179, 179-80. 3 See id. 4 See id. 5 See PHILIP M. BLAIR, FEDERALISM AND JUDICIAL REVIEW IN WEST GERMANY 26 (1981). 6 See id. 7 See id.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most