Judicial Review

Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights, Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law. Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.

Canada's Supreme Court decides cases with far-reaching effects on Canadian politics and public policies. When the Supreme Court sets cases on its agenda, it exercises nearly unrestrained discretion and considerable public authority. But how does the Court choose these cases in the first place? From the several hundred requests for judicial review filed every year, how and why do the justices pick some cases but not others for review? Tournament of Appeals investigates the leave to appeal process in Canada and explores how and why certain cases "win" a place on the Court's agenda and others do not. Taking the approach that the process mimics a sports tournament, this study raises several vital questions. For example, is there an elite Supreme Court "bar" that routinely wins the tournament? Do the Court's rules affect the tournament's outcomes? Or does winning and losing reflect the resources of the parties? As players in this tournament, how do the judges play the game and how does it affect their votes to grant or deny judicial review? Drawing from systematically collected information on the process, applications, and lawyers that has never before been used in studies of Canada's Supreme Court, Roy B. Flemming offers both a qualitatively- and quantitatively-based explanation of how Canada's justices grant judicial review. The first of its kind, this innovative study will draw the attention of lawyers, academics, and students in Canada as well as in the Commonwealth, and European countries whose high courts share many features of the appeals process in Canada.

Five essays examine the concept of "judicial review" from a historical perspective. The term is defined as the power and duty of a court to disregard ultra vires legislative acts.

"This book provides a thorough overview of the law of judicial and political control of federal agencies. The primary focus is on the availability and scope of judicial review, but the book also discusses the control exercised by the U.S. president and Congress"--Provided by publisher.

Judicial Review: A Practical Guide is a handbook which aims to be a first port of call in all matters concerning judicial review applications, whether in civil or criminal proceedings. This new edition has been significantly amended to take account of the following developments in law and practice, including: * Development of the Unified Tribunal system with transfers of judicial reviews * Regionalisation of Administrative Court * Clear development of mistake of fact as a mistake of law * Increasing understanding of the impact of the Human Rights Act * Limitations upon judicial review in the context of immigration * Ongoing case-law developments * Changes to Appeals (CPR Pt 52) * Developments in costs and funding In addition to the authors' commentary, Judicial Review: A Practical Guide contains over 20 precedents covering all aspects of the litigation process, together with all the main legislative and judicial materials.

Any practitioner faced with the decision as to whether to appeal, or who has questions arising at each stage, will benefit enormously from a book that examines the law, principles, procedures, and processes involved. This leading work has been updated and restructured, to ensure it provides guidance on the complete and complex process of making a civil appeal. Clearly written and cross referenced, the books UK/European coverage of appeals includes: -- District Judges to Circuit Judges in the County Court -- Masters and District Judges to High Court Judges -- Court of Appeal -- House of Lords -- Privy Council -- The European Court -- The European Court of Human Rights -- Administrative Law and Elections