1 See also Dyevre, Arthur, Reassessing the Case for Judicial Review: Judges as Agents and Judges as Trustees, 3–4 (CEPC/MPIL, Working Paper, 2012), available at http://works.bepress.com/arthur_dyevre1/3/.Google Scholar

2 Alluding to Jack N. Rakove, The Origins of Judicial Review: A Plea for New Contexts, 49 Stan. L. Rev. 1031 (1997).Google Scholar

3 Bayón, Juan Carlos, Democracia y derechos: problemas de fundamentación del constitucionalismo, in Constitución y derechos fundamentales, 67 (Jerónimo Betegón et al. eds., 2004), available at http://www.upf.edu/filosofiadeldret/_pdf/bayon-democracia.pdf. See also Mark Tushnet, A Goldilocs Account of Judicial Review?, 37 U.S.F. L. Rev. 63 (2002).Google Scholar

4 Brudner, Alan, Constitutional Goods (2004).Google Scholar

5 Bickel, Alexander M., The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics 25–26 (1962).Google Scholar

6 See Rodotà, Carla, Storia della Corte costituzionale 47 (Saggi Tascabili Laterza ed., 1999). I am indebted to Raphaël Paour for this information.Google Scholar

7 See, e.g., James C. McReynolds, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/justices/james_c_mcreynolds (last visited May 13, 2013).Google Scholar

8 See The Supreme Court in Conference (1940-1985): The Private Discussions Behind Nearly 300 Supreme Court Decisions (Del Dickson ed., 2001); Edward P. Lazarus, Closed Chambers: The First Eyewitness Account of the Epic Struggles Inside the Supreme Court (1998).Google Scholar

9 Dahl, Robert A., Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker, 6 J. Pub. L. 279, 293 (1957).Google Scholar

10 Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).Google Scholar

11 See, e.g., Kim Lane Scheppele, Democracy by Judiciary (Or Why Courts Can Sometimes Be More Democratic Than Parliaments), http://law.wustl.edu/harris/conferences/constitutionalconf/ScheppelePaper.pdf (last visited May 13, 2013).Google Scholar

12 State v. Makwanyane 1996 (3) SA 391 (CC) (S. Afr.).Google Scholar

13 S. Afr. v. Grootboom 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC) (S. Afr.).Google Scholar

14 Minister of Health v. Treatment Action Campaign 2002 (5) SA 721 (CC) (S. Afr.).Google Scholar

15 Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856).Google Scholar

16 Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905).Google Scholar

17 Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944).Google Scholar

18 Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).Google Scholar

19 Conseil constitutionnel [CC] [Constitutional Court] decision Nos. 3/E/2012 & 14/E/2012, Jan. 29, 2012 (Ivory Coast).Google Scholar

20 Tribunal supremo de justicia [TSJ] [Supreme Tribunal of Justice], Sala constitucional, Expediente No. 11–1130, Oct. 17, 2011 (Venezuela), available at http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/scon/octubre/1547-171011-2011-11-1130.html.Google Scholar

21 Conseil constitutionnel [CC] [Constitutional Court] decision No. 2012–240QPC, May 4, 2012 (Fr.), available at http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-constitutionnel/root/bank/pdf/conseil-constitutionnel-114585.pdf.Google Scholar

22 Underkuffler, Laura, Moral Rights, Judicial Review, and Democracy: A Response to Horacio Spector, 22(3-4) L. & Phil. 335, 342 (2003).Google Scholar

23 See Mark Tushnet, Taking the Constitution Away From the Courts (1999); Kramer, Larry D., The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (2004); Whittington, Keith E., Constitutional Construction: Divided Powers and Constitutional Meaning (1999).Google Scholar

24 See also Grimm, Dieter, Constitutional Adjudication and Democracy, 33 Isr. L. Rev. 193, 195–196 (1999) (“There is neither a fundamental contradiction nor a necessary connection between constitutional adjudication and democracy. Judicial review has a number of democratic advantages. But it also creates some democratic risks. Consequently, the question whether or not a country should adopt constitutional adjudication is not one of principle, but one of pragmatics.”). See also Juan Carlos Bayón, Derechos, democracia y constitución, 1 Discusiones, 65, 88 (2000).Google Scholar

25 Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning (Walter Wheeler Cook ed., Greenwood Press 1978) (1913).Google Scholar

26 See Kelsen, Hans, La garantie juridictionnelle de la Constitution (La Justice constitutionnelle), Revue du droit public et de la science politique en France et à l'étranger 197 (1928); Kelsen, Hans, Wer soll der Hüter der verfassung sein? (1931); Kelsen, Hans, Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the Austrian and the American Constitution, 4 J. of Politics 183 (1942).Google Scholar

27 Kelsen, Hans, Hauptprobleme der Staatsrechtslehre entwickelt aus der Lehre vom Rechtssatze (1911).Google Scholar

28 See, e.g., Hans Kelsen, Reine Rechtslehre: Einleitung in die rechtswissentschaftliche Problematik 51–72 (Matthias Jestaedt ed., Scienta Verlag 2008) (1934), translated in Hans Kelsen, An Introduction to the Problems of Legal Theory: Translation of the First Edition of the “Reine Rechtslehre” or Pure Theory of Law 37–53 (Bonnie Litschewski Paulson & Stanley L. Paulson trans., 1992).Google Scholar

29 See, e.g., Manuel Atienza & Juan Ruiz Manero, A Theory of Legal Sentences, (Ruth Zimmerling trans., 1998).Google Scholar

30 Dworkin, Ronald, Taking Rights Seriously (1978).Google Scholar

31 Kelsen, , supra note 28, at 71 (German version), 52 (English version).Google Scholar

32 Pinelli, Cesare, Constitutional Reasoning and Political Deliberation, 14 German L.J. 1171 (2013).Google Scholar

33 Id. Google Scholar

34 See, e.g., J. Mitchell Pickerill, Constitutional Deliberation in Congress: The Impact of Judicial Review in a Separated System (2004); Peabody, Bruce G., Congressional Constitutional Interpretation and the Courts: A Preliminary Inquiry into Legislative Attitudes, 1959–2001, 29 Law & Soc. Inquiry 127 (2004).Google Scholar

35 Pinelli, , supra note 32.Google Scholar

36 Cappelletti, Mauro, Il controllo giudiziario di costituzionalità delle leggi nel diritto comparato 105–115 (1968).Google Scholar

37 Tusseau, Guillaume, Le pouvoir des juges constitutionnels, in 3 Traité international de droit constitutionnel 169–206 (Michel Troper & Dominique Chagnollaud eds., 2012).Google Scholar

38 Goodman, Nelson, Ways of Worldmaking (1978).Google Scholar

39 Pinelli, , supra note 32.Google Scholar

40 See William James, Pragmatism 35, 35–54 (Dover Thrift Eds. 1995) (1907).Google Scholar

41 Glendon, Mary Ann, Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse, at xi (1991).Google Scholar

42 Tusseau, Guillaume, Jeremy Bentham: La guerre des mots (2011).Google Scholar

43 See also Pierre Bourdieu & Richard Terdiman, The Force of Law: Towards a Sociology of the Juridical Field, 38 Hastings L. J. 805 (1987).Google Scholar

44 Teubner, Gunther & Fischer-Lescano, Andreas, Cannibalizing Epistemes: Will Modern Law Protect Traditional Cultural Expressions?, in Intellectual Property and Traditional Cultural Expressions: Legal Protection in a Digital Environment 17, 17–45 (Christoph Beat Graber & Mira Burri-Nenova eds., 2008).Google Scholar

45 See, e.g., Jeremy Bentham, Justice and Codification Petitions, in 5 The Works of Jeremy Bentham 481, 512 (John Bowring ed., William Tait 1838).Google Scholar

46 Rawls, John, Political Liberalism 235 (1993).Google Scholar

47 See, e.g., Jean-François Kerléo, La transparence en droit. Recherche sur la formation d'une culture juridique (Oct. 5, 2012) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University Jean Moulin Lyon 3).Google Scholar

48 See, e.g., Baranger, Denis, Sur la manière française de rendre la justice constitutionnelle. Motivations et raisons politiques dans la jurisprudence du Conseil constitutionnel, 7 Jus Politicum, (2012), available at http://juspoliticum.com/Sur-la-maniere-francaise-de-rendre.html; Arthur Dyevre, France: Patterns of Argumentation in Constitutional Council Opinions, in Constitutional Reasoning in Comparative Perspective (forthcoming), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2026396.Google Scholar

49 Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).Google Scholar

50 County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, 577 (1989). I am indebted to Mathilde Cohen for this example.Google Scholar

51 2 Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 76 (Max Farrand ed., Yale Univ. Press 1966) (1911).Google Scholar

52 Joseph, Raz, On the Authority and Interpretation of Constitutions: Some Preliminaries, in Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations 167 (Larry Alexander ed., 1998).Google Scholar

53 Thayer, James B., The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law, 7 Harvard L. Rev. 129, 155–156 (1893).Google Scholar

54 Statement on Signing the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, 1 Pub. Papers 503 (Mar. 27, 2002).Google Scholar

55 Graber, Mark A., The Non-Majoritarian Difficulty: Legislative Deference to the Judiciary, 7 Studies in American Political Development 35 (1993); Fiorina, Morris P., Legislator Uncertainty, Legislative Control, and the Delegation of Legislative Power, 2 J.L. Econ & Org. 33 (1986); Weaver, R. Kent, The Politics of Blame Avoidance, 6 J. Pub. Pol'y 371 (1986).Google Scholar

56 Conseil constitutionnel [CC] [Constitutional Court] decision No. 82–146DC, Nov. 18, 1982 (Fr.) (Loi modifiant le code électoral et le code des communes et relative à l'élection des conseillers municipaux et aux conditions d'inscription des Français établis hors de France sur les listes électorales). See Daniele Lochak, Les hommes politiques, les ‘sages’ (?) … et les femmes (à propos de la décision du Conseil constitutionnel du 18 novembre 1982), Droit social 131 (1983).Google Scholar