On the Limits of Constitutional Adjudication

1. Front Matter

   Pages i-xx

   PDF

2. German and Brazilian Constitutional Cultures: Constitutional Adjudication and Activism

   1. Front Matter

      Pages 1-1

      PDF

   2. An Approach to Decision-Making

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 3-30

   3. Balancing Within the Context of German Constitutionalism: The Bundesverfassungsgericht’s Shift to Activism

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 31-81

   4. Balancing Within the Context of Brazilian Constitutionalism: The Supremo Tribunal Federal’s Shift to Activism

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 83-131

3. The Debate on the Rationality of Balancing

   1. Front Matter

      Pages 133-133

      PDF

   2. The Aim to Rationalize Balancing Within the Context of Constitutional Courts’ Activism

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 135-159

   3. When Différance Comes to Light: Balancing Within the Context of Deconstruction

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 161-241

   4. When Procedures Towards Mutual Understanding Come to Light: Balancing Within the Context of Proceduralism

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 243-329

4. The Concept of Limited Rationality

   1. Front Matter

      Pages 331-331

      PDF

   2. Between Différance and Intersubjectivity: The Concept of Limited Rationality in Constitutional Democracy

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 333-364

   3. Between Différance and Intersubjectivity: The Concept of Limited Rationality in the Realm of Constitutional Adjudication

      • Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

      Pages 365-405

5. Back Matter

   Pages 407-421

   PDF

Juliano Z. Benvindo investigates the current movement of constitutional courts towards political activism, especially by focusing on the increasing use of the balancing method as a “rational” justification for this process. From the critical perception of the serious risks of this movement to democracy, the book takes as examples two constitutional realities, Germany and Brazil, in order to discuss the rationality, correctness, and legitimacy of constitutional decisions within this context. Through a dialogue between Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction and Jürgen Habermas’s proceduralism, the author confronts Robert Alexy’s defense of the balancing method as well as those two constitutional realities. This confrontation leads to the introduction of the concept of limited rationality applied to constitutional democracy and constitutional adjudication, which affirms the double bind of history and justice as a condition for a practice of decision-making committed to the principle of separation of powers.

• Constitutional Courts
• Constitutionalism
• Habermas
• justice

• Brasília, Brazil

  Juliano Zaiden Benvindo

Policies and ethics