A Survey of Comparative Methodologies: The Constant Presence and Silent Rise of Intent and History in Constitutional Adjudication
This article studies how different courts around the world have used intent-based methods of constitutional interpretation that privilege formal legislative history, similar to some versions of originalism in the United States. It also analyzes how these interpretive approaches have produced progressive results in many instances. This generates three lessons. First, that intent-based methods of constitutional interpretation are not an exclusive U.S. phenom- enon. Two, that originalism is not inherently conservative nor reactionary. And third, that a comparative approach can yield important methodological lessons that may be useful for courts and scholars around the world. In par- ticular, this article offers a survey of judicial experiences in countries with different constitutional experiences, such as Australia, Canada, India, Turkey, Malaysia, Singapore, Alaska, Chile and Germany.
Revista Jurídica de la Universidad Interamericana de Puerto Rico
Jorge M. Farinacci Fernós,
A Survey of Comparative Methodologies: The Constant Presence and Silent Rise of Intent and History in Constitutional Adjudication,
Rev. Jur. U. Interamericana de P.R.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/1084
This record does not contain full text. If available, click on the "DOI" link to see where the full text of the item is located. If you are a UB student, or faculty or staff member and unable to access the full text at the link, try searching for the item in Everything Search (https://search.lib.buffalo.edu/discovery/search?vid=01SUNY_BUF:everything). If not available, request via Delivery+ (https://library.buffalo.edu/delivery/).