Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The "Globalized Judiciary" and the Rule of Law

The "Globalized Judiciary" and the Rule of Law Ken I. Kersch Like everything else, constitutional reasoning is going global. nations (including, in time, the newly de-colonized nations) In the U.S. Supreme Court's recent affirmative action and gay manifested a resolute new commitment to constitutional self-govrights decisions, several justices made prominent reference to ernment. Sovereignty ­ understood then as a pre-condition of foreign practices, court decisions, and international agreements constitutional democracy ­ was, in this context, highly valued. So (both those ratified by the U.S., and those not).1 While, strictly long as free nations were committed to a few bedrock rule of law speaking, not unprecedented, these allusions were significant in and democratic principles (principles set out in horatory fashion in the current context because they heralded the arrival at the Court the U.N. Charter and a series of prominent international declaraof a vast, decade-long vanguardist inteltions), the choice of a set of institutions lectual project aimed at globalizing was considered the province of soverIn its broadest sense, the modern American law an0d the American judieign, self-governing states. A comparainterest in deepening our comparaciary. In the past, similarly ambitious tive perspective was judged useful tive understanding of constitutions projects, like the sociological jurisprubecause the best choices concerning http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Good Society Penn State University Press

The "Globalized Judiciary" and the Rule of Law

The Good Society , Volume 13 (3) – Nov 4, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/penn-state-university-press/the-globalized-judiciary-and-the-rule-of-law-uAMryn30xs
Publisher
Penn State University Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by The Pennsylvania State University.
ISSN
1538-9731
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Ken I. Kersch Like everything else, constitutional reasoning is going global. nations (including, in time, the newly de-colonized nations) In the U.S. Supreme Court's recent affirmative action and gay manifested a resolute new commitment to constitutional self-govrights decisions, several justices made prominent reference to ernment. Sovereignty ­ understood then as a pre-condition of foreign practices, court decisions, and international agreements constitutional democracy ­ was, in this context, highly valued. So (both those ratified by the U.S., and those not).1 While, strictly long as free nations were committed to a few bedrock rule of law speaking, not unprecedented, these allusions were significant in and democratic principles (principles set out in horatory fashion in the current context because they heralded the arrival at the Court the U.N. Charter and a series of prominent international declaraof a vast, decade-long vanguardist inteltions), the choice of a set of institutions lectual project aimed at globalizing was considered the province of soverIn its broadest sense, the modern American law an0d the American judieign, self-governing states. A comparainterest in deepening our comparaciary. In the past, similarly ambitious tive perspective was judged useful tive understanding of constitutions projects, like the sociological jurisprubecause the best choices concerning

Journal

The Good SocietyPenn State University Press

Published: Nov 4, 2004

There are no references for this article.