Search

In recent years several scholars have argued that there has been a weakening of the power of national legislatures. This paper addresses two empirical questions: Has global legislative power indeed declined (as has been claimed)? And if so, what factors might explain where legislative power has declined and where it has not? Using data from the Varieties of Democracy (V-dem) project from 1990 to 2020 to measure changes in legislative power, I find that the decline of legislative power has not been monotonic globally, and that there is considerable variation by countries in the world. In this paper, I test a set of institutional, economic, cultural and global explanations for legislative decline that has been proposed by the literature and find that much of this literature is either not supported, or only partially supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The argument that choosing a legislative model will strengthen Parliament's checks and balances in an emergency has not been proven in Indonesia. Due to the high president's constitutional legislative power, combined with his coalition supported by a majority of parliamentarians in Covid-19 emergency, left parliament to serve much of the executive's agenda. This paper compares the law-making process in the parliamentary period before and during the pandemic. Extreme partisan power will allow the executive to control the legislative agenda and weaken Parliament's legislative power under the pretext of the Covid-19 pandemic emergency. The 'legislative model' is no longer viable; instead, various laws have been passed, unrelated to Covid-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legislatures are having their moment. From the independent state legislature theory, to the major questions doctrine, to the potential scrapping of the Chevron doctrine, to efforts to constrain popular initiatives, legislative power today seems to be, or at least seeks to be, ascendant. At the state level, one example of the expansion of legislative power is the reinvigoration of legislative veto mechanisms. Legislative vetoes allow legislative branch actors to nullify duly authorized executive branch actions without enacting new laws. Forty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Chadha invalidated the federal legislative veto as an unconstitutional end-run around the lawmaking requirements of Article I of the U.S. Constitution. But this decision had no binding effect on state legislative veto mechanisms. Today, legislative vetoes persist in many states, and efforts to enhance these mechanisms have surfaced specifically in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, state legislatures sought heightened legislative veto authority on matters of public health. The pandemic presented public health authorities throughout the country with unprecedented challenges. But little did public health officials anticipate that one challenge would come in the form of legislative pushback against the deployment of public health expertise, as state legislators in many states objected to mask mandates, vaccination campaigns, and other public health measures undertaken by state agencies. Legislatures in several states either stripped public health agencies of some of their discretionary powers or imposed additional hurdles on the exercise of these powers. Many other states have contemplated similar retrenchments. In inviting closer examination of state legislative veto mechanisms, this Article argues that these mechanisms suffer from several anti-democratic defects. Specifically, these mechanisms erode the legitimacy of legislative power, inhibit transparency in governance, prevent formation of customized administrative policies, and threaten to skew the balance of the separation of powers beyond traditional constitutional parameters. Legislation during the COVID-19 pandemic provides a dramatic example of these democratic flaws inherent to the legislative veto, but state legislative vetoes could also hobble other public policy areas. It thus is time for additional attention to the place of the legislative veto in state government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Pos-Graduacao em Saude Coletiva and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Sakarya University Journal of Law Faculty (SHD) is the property of Sakarya University Journal of Law Faculty (SHD) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article states that the subjects of special criminological prevention of criminal offenses committed by probation subjects are probation bodies, police, non-specialized subjects of prevention (legislative and judicial power, their structural bodies and institutions, various formations and public associations, owners of enterprises), as well as judicial authorities and other bodies of state control, local self-government bodies, etc. Among the main directions of special criminological prevention of criminal offenses are: counteraction to manifestations of antisocial orientation and criminogenic motivation of the convict; involvement of psychologists and specialists from other spheres of life in the process of correction and resocialization of convicts; reducing the influence of external causes and conditions for the commission of a criminal offense, etc. It is proved that the introduction of these directions is an important step towards building a qualitatively new model of probation, created not on the ideology of control and authority, but on the therapeutic and rehabilitation philosophy. It is determined that probation personnel process a large amount of information and make strategic decisions, but it is necessary to take into account numerous and competing professional, political and personal interests in providing assistance to probation subjects. Since most of the decisions made by the probation officer during the preparation of the pre-trial report are intuitive, taking into account previous experience and rarely focus on the study of criminogenic needs and taking into account the results of the study of the convict's personality, taking into account the correctional programs he has undergone. It is determined that the basis of special criminological crime prevention by the probation body should be a change in the strategy of probation from a form of supervision focused on individual preventive influence on the convict to a form that would be based on compliance with the conditions of probation, implementation of plans for special criminological prevention, support of the convict, assistance in restoring the violated rights not only to the convict, but also to the convict, but also the victim, which would provide an opportunity to determine the optimally appropriate number of supervisory meetings between the probation officer and the convict and reduce the workload of probation officers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes the implications of a legislative omission on U.S. climate change future. Topics include the impact of the decision of two federal circuit courts to stop the supposed federal preemption of state and local resistance to national climate policy, an analysis of the darker climate side of the U.S. separation of powers in the U.S. legal system, and the attempt of the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden to remedy the failure of the Energy Policy Act (EPA) of 2005.

Jean Bodin defines sovereignty as the perpetual and absolute power of the Commonwealth - that is to say - a legislative power that knows neither conditions, nor constraints, nor obligations. Nevertheless, he also affirms that all sovereigns are subject to the laws of God and nature and to several human laws common to all peoples. So how can a power define as absolute can have limits? This is the contradiction pointed out by several interpreters of his political thought. My purpose is to show the imprecision of these opinions and to propose an interpretation that makes consistent the idea that the sovereign can be both above the civil law and subject to boundaries that limit his power to legislate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Whitlam Labor government (1972–75) is remembered for ushering in a new era in Indigenous affairs, with the move to "self‐determination", abandoning the longstanding insistence on "assimilation". The new government intended to deploy the Commonwealth's new legislative power established in the 1967 constitutional referendum to bring in a range of reforms, responding to consistent demands from Indigenous leaders, activists, and supporters through the previous decade. Whitlam's campaign speech promised anti‐discrimination legislation, provisions to allow Aboriginal communities to incorporate, and legislation of a system of land tenure. The government faced considerable political obstacles, ultimately curbing the ambitious reform agenda. Nevertheless, these initial efforts to conceptualise representation, recognition, and compensation laid important foundations for the current public debate about "Voice, Treaty, Truth", following the Uluru Statement from the Heart. This paper explores self‐determination through the path‐breaking work of the Woodward Aboriginal Land Rights Commission and the establishment of well‐resourced land councils as authoritative and legitimate representatives of Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. The Whitlam government's willingness to experiment with power‐sharing in the sensitive area of land ownership provided a valuable prototype for genuine engagement with First Nations people today, as Australia contemplates the failure of the constitutional referendum around a Voice to parliament. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on current developments in canon law. Because it concerns many aspects of ecclesial experience and impacts the Codex Iuris Canonici, the frenetic rate of legislative production not infrequently leads to problems of coordination and systematic rationalization, prompting in turn various recent issues that may have significant consequences for legal certainty in the Church. In light of this complex situation, we retrace some considerations by authoritative scholars from two decades before the Second World War, who compared legal certainty in the secular legal systems of their time with the absolutely specific - and irreducible to the latter - legal certainty proper to the ecclesial legal system. The purpose is to ask whether such reflections, though strictly linked to the historical context in which they were formulated, may also serve as a source of inspiration in relation to the impasse in which canon law currently finds itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The executive veto is one of the most important instruments of presidential power within the legislative arena. Because of constitutional requirements, every regular veto and many pocket vetoes are accompanied by a short letter to Congress from the president describing—often in detail—the reasoning behind the decision to veto. As such, these messages form a unique window into interbranch and partisan conflict over time. While analyses have been conducted on the broad patterns of veto use, questions remain concerning presidential motivations for vetoing as well as how these motivations have evolved over time along with changing political institutions. Using a data set of approximately 2000 unique veto messages from the first in 1792 to the last of President Trump's vetoes in 2021, we examine the content of veto messages to uncover the number and kind of arguments used by presidents when addressing Congress over vetoed legislation. Our analysis uncovers significant variation, with the evolution of arguments within veto messages mirroring broader political trends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Anbar University for Law & Political Sciences is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In contrast to other studies on policy entrepreneurship that address frontline officials' roles in formal legislative procedures, this case study focuses on how frontline officials promote policy innovation within inconspicuous administrative routines. Because frontline officials have no legislative power, they must overcome officialism by using bureaucratic skills and seeking consensus among multiple stakeholders. "Citizen agents" and "state agents" are both necessary roles. This case provides administrative details on how a deadlocked policy was gradually enlivened within undramatic administrative routines. The findings bridge the legislative–administrative gap and improve the understanding of the long-term effects of frontline administrative activities on policy innovations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Supreme Court of the United States has generally been a very aggressive enforcer of legal limitations on governmental power. In various periods in its history, the Court has gone far beyond enforcing clearly expressed and easily ascertainable constitutional and statutory provisions and has suppressed innovation by the other branches that do not necessarily transgress widely held social norms. Novel assertions of legislative power, novel interpretations of federal statutes, statutes that are in tension with well-established common law rules, and state laws adopted by only a few states are suspect simply because they are novel or rub up against tradition. In periods of governmental innovation and assertions of expanded authority, this aggression becomes evident and perhaps more robust. In recent years, the Court has created new barriers to government innovation even as government is confronted with serious threats to the health and welfare of mankind. Chief among this new set of limitations on the power of federal administrative agencies is an interpretive device that has become known as the Major Questions Doctrine (MQD). This doctrine purports to be based on a traditional view of legislative intent and judicial role, but in reality it resonates more with conservative anti-regulatory political views. Under this new doctrine, the Court rejects agency assertions of regulatory authority when it finds that the agency's action would have major social and economic effects and lacks crystal clear congressional authorization. Ironically, because the MQD has no basis in the Administrative Procedure Act or prior law, the Court has in effect created a major new doctrine of administrative law severely limiting agency authority without clear authorization from Congress. The Court has also suppressed agency innovation by confining Chevron deference to unimportant issues of statutory construction. Chevron, for all of its faults, has the virtue of validating agency policy innovation so long as Congress had not clearly denied agency authority. This reform to Chevron, together with the creation and application of the Major Questions Doctrine, in effect accomplishes the aim of some Justices to impose a more robust nondelegation doctrine, making agency innovation even more difficult. In addition, the Court has worked to prevent innovation in other areas of law, such as agency structure, gun control, and the spending power, preventing the state and federal governments from taking action to deal with pressing social problems. The current Court has truly become an anti-innovation Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Derecho del Estado is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 2022, the Welsh Government announced plans to increase the size of the Welsh Parliament/Senedd Cymru, a culmination of two decades of elite-level argument over whether more members should parallel the institution's growing suite of legislative and fiscal powers. While an expanded legislature may improve the Senedd's capacity to scrutinise the executive, opposition has focused on increased costs that detract from core public spending. Using a novel survey experiment conducted in the 2021 Welsh Election Study, we assess public attitudes and find that support for expanding the Senedd is limited to those with a strong Welsh-only identity and pro-autonomy preferences. Although appeals to holding the executive to account do not broaden this base of support, a framing that the Senedd should be comparable in size to legislatures in Scotland and Northern Ireland does have a positive effect on voters with more median constitutional preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Archivio Giuridico is the property of Mucchi Editore and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Politics in Latin America is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Unwritten principles serve crucial purposes in the UK’s constitution. For example, they provide guardrails for judicial interpretation of legislation, and they form or give rise to substantive rules about the limits of legislative, judicial and executive power. With a growing body of research on unwritten constitutionalism, it is worth considering why these issues matter, and what is at stake in the debate. This post considers two issues which it argues can only be properly understood once regard is paid to the unwritten principles and norms in the UK’s constitution: the limits of Westminster’s legislative power, and the nature of the UK’s territorial constitution.

‌ ∴ Introduction ∴ ‌The foundational stability of any society is significantly anchored in the presence and enforcement of laws. The enactment of laws, a primary responsibility of governance, ensures that societal relationships are regulated based on fairness and justice, thereby securing societal continuity and stability. The constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran entrusts the Islamic Consultative Assembly with the authority to enact ordinary laws, emphasizing the legislature's monopoly over legislation. This exclusive right entails not only the privilege to legislate but also the duty to do so, ensuring that the legislative needs of society are met. In instances where the legislative body fails to fulfill its mandate, whether due to internal disagreements or conflicts of interest, it raises a pivotal question about the role of leadership, specifically the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist [Vali-ye Faqih], in addressing legislative voids and guaranteeing citizens' rights to an efficient legislative system. This paper delves into the constitutional frameworks within Iran that enable leadership intervention in legislative processes, aiming to explore the mechanisms through which leadership can address the absence of necessary legislation and its implications on societal stability.‌ ∴ Research Question ∴ ‌The central inquiry of this study revolves around the role of leadership, particularly the legal personality of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, in filling the void created by legislative inaction within the Islamic Republic of Iran. Specifically, the research seeks to answer: "How can the leadership institution, under the current constitutional framework of the Islamic Republic of Iran, ensure the right of citizens to benefit from an efficient legislative power, particularly in situations where the legislative body fails to enact necessary legislation, leading to a legal vacuum?"‌ ∴ Research Hypothesis ∴ ‌The hypothesis posited in this research is that the leadership in Iran, especially embodied by the guardianship, possesses the constitutional authority and mechanisms to effectively address and fill legislative voids. This capability is critical in situations where the legislative body is incapacitated by internal disagreements, conflicts of interest, or procedural inefficiencies. The leadership's intervention, as hypothesized, is not only constitutionally sanctioned but is also a necessary mechanism for safeguarding the citizens' right to an efficient legislative system and maintaining societal stability in the face of legislative inaction.‌ ∴ Methodology & Framework, if Applicable ∴ ‌The research adopts a descriptive-analytical methodology, drawing upon a thorough review of the constitutional law of Iran and extensive library research. This study focuses on elucidating the constitutional basis that mandates the leadership's involvement in legislative processes, particularly analyzing articles 57 and 110 of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Through this analytical framework, the research aims to identify the competencies of the leadership in ensuring the enactment of necessary legislation and securing citizens' rights against legislative inefficiencies. The study's approach is distinguished by its emphasis on the "timeliness" of law enactment, prioritizing the prevention of legal vacuums over the qualitative aspects of the legislation. This methodology facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the leadership's role in crisis resolution and the establishment of a legal mechanism to address legislative voids.‌ ∴ Results & Discussion ∴ ‌The analysis reveals that the leadership within the Islamic Republic of Iran plays a pivotal role in addressing legislative inefficiencies and ensuring the citizens' right to an effective legislative system. The study highlights that the constitution grants the Guardian Jurist, significant powers to intervene when the legislative assembly fails to meet the legislative needs of society. These powers are rooted in various constitutional provisions, notably Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 of Article 110, which collectively empower the leadership to supervise the proper execution of policies, issue referenda decrees, resolve disputes between powers, and address systemic problems. This constitutional framework enables the leadership to act decisively in instances of legislative deadlock or legal vacuum, thereby preventing harm to society and ensuring the continuity of governance. The research underscores the leadership's authority to issue state decrees [Hokm-e Hukoomati] as an exceptional measure to fill legislative voids. These decrees, while potentially lacking in the quality and technicality of laws enacted through the ordinary legislative process, serve as a necessary intervention to address immediate legislative needs and safeguard public interests.‌ ∴ Conclusion ∴ ‌The study concludes that the leadership in the Islamic Republic of Iran, by virtue of its constitutional mandate, possesses the necessary competencies to address legislative inefficiencies and ensure the protection of citizens' rights to an efficient legislative system. The constitution provides a robust framework for leadership intervention in cases where the legislative assembly fails to fulfill its legislative duties, offering various mechanisms for resolving legal vacuums and preventing societal harm. The leadership's role, as defined by the Constitution, is essential in maintaining the stability and continuity of the legal system, particularly in ensuring that the legislative needs of society are met in a timely and effective manner. The unique competencies granted to the leadership, including the authority to issue state decrees [Hokm-e Hukoomati] and direct legislative action, highlight the Iranian legal system's innovative approach to safeguarding public rights and addressing legislative voids. This extraordinary framework ensures that the risk of infringing citizens' fundamental rights due to legislative inefficiency is minimized. The leadership institution, with its comprehensive constitutional powers, emerges as a critical mechanism for guaranteeing public rights and facilitating effective governance, thereby affirming its unique position within the Iranian legal and constitutional order.

Objective/Context: This article studies the political responsibility of the Extraordinary Congress of 1847 in the development of the Bolivian Revolution of that year. It was summoned by the government of José de Ballivián (1841-1847) to authorize him to wage a possible war with Peru, in which the notion of national independence was associated with that of mercantile liberty and which sought to resolve a long-standing tariff dispute that could have implications for territorial expansion. Since this gathering took place in the context of the loss of political and social capital of the Executive, it is hypothesized that the effort of the Presidency to pacify Bolivia internally through an international war, posed in terms of patriotic unity, made it possible for the Congress to act as the promoter of the Revolution and to empower itself as the governing body. The revolutionary legitimizing argument was built on the basis, on the one hand, of the discussions among the representatives on the distribution of the powers of the State with the Executive; on the other hand, of the fear of the population that the armed solution would expose Bolivians to commercial, territorial and freedom losses and, even, to the deprivation of independence. Originality: This study presents a new perspective on the political leadership exercised by the Congress, first, by contradicting the cliché on the governmental omniscience of the Executive and, second, by showing the leading role of the representatives in the promotion of political and constitutional use of arms, as opposed to the cliché of a public life defined by military caudillos or by caudillista militarism. Methodology: Through a theoretical interweaving of neo-constitutionalism and legal sociology, together with a method of conceptual history, the article identifies the actors and parties of the Revolution, their motivations and reciprocal relations, their action protocol, and their initiatives aimed at both pacifying and promoting the Revolution. Conclusions: The leadership of the Legislative in the fall of Ballivián through the revolutionary solution shows the intention of the former to preserve the constituent and law-creating conscience to which Bolivia’s republican existence was owed. Likewise, the role of the congressmen in the appeal of constitutional armed violence—citizenship in arms—helps to clarify the dynamics of institutional and social legitimization and delegitimization of the revolutionary leadership in the 19th century.

Objective/context: The study aimed to analyze the debate among Brazilian women senators during the impeachment trial of Dilma Rousseff in 2016. Methodology: Elements of discourse analysis were applied to investigate the main question: How did the debate develop among women senators, considering the ideological spectrum of the party and their position on the impediment (favorable or contrary)? The analysis presents a political-ideological profile of women senators, the arguments used by them in the debate, and the different uses of the defense of democracy. Conclusions: The left-wing women senators were more diligent and repeated their arguments more frequently to increase their discursive visibility. They also addressed the non-existence of a crime of responsibility, a condition to initiate an impeachment process. Women senators from the right and the center, on the other hand, resorted to rhetorical models to reiterate that the then-president of the Republic was no longer in a position to maintain a parliamentary base to support her government. The senators of this group also stated that the investigations demonstrated the use of schemes to irresponsibly disguise public accounts, exclusively with a view to Rousseff's reelection. Originality: It is relevant to highlight the original fact that this is an analysis of the impediment of a woman in the office of President of the Republic from the female perspective of the parliamentary body of the Senate, the institution in charge of judging the impeachment process.

The Major Question Doctrine has emerged as an apparently powerful new tool for courts when deciding issues involving lederal agencies. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court bolstered a major questions exception that had operated in the background of previous Court decisions, labeling it the Major Question Doctrine. Under the Major Question Doctrine, courts must ask if the question presented by an agency's rule is an economically or politically significant question. If the court decides that it is, the court must identify clear congressional authorization for the rule to uphold the rule. This Note briefly follows the development of the Major Question Doctrine through the Court's jurisprudence and attempts to explain how the Doctrine functions. This Note also identifies ilaws, ambiguities, and confusion resulting from the Court's decision. Finally, this Note attempts to predict the effect that the Major Question Doctrine will have on present and future challenges to rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Labor and other federal labor agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Steffen Ganghof's Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism: Democratic Design and the Separation of Powers (Oxford University Press, 2021) posits that "in a democracy, a constitutional separation of powers between the executive and the assembly may be desirable, but the constitutional concentration of executive power in a single human being is not" (Ganghof, 2021). To consider, examine and theorise about this, Ganghof urges engagement with semi-parliamentarism. As explained by Ganghof, legislative power is shared between two democratically legitimate sections of parliament in a semi-parliamentary system, but only one of those sections selects the government and can remove it in a no-confidence vote. Consequently, power is dispersed and not concentrated in the hands of any one person, which, Ganghof argues, can lead to an enhanced form of parliamentary democracy. In this book review symposium, George Tsebelis, Michael Thies, José Antonio Cheibub, Rosalind Dixon and Daniel Bogéa review Steffen Ganghof's book and engage with the author about aspects of research design, case selection and theoretical argument. This symposium arose from an engaging and constructive discussion of the book at a seminar hosted by Texas A&M University in 2022. We thank Prof José Cheibub (Texas A&M) for organising that seminar and Dr Anna Fruhstorfer (University of Potsdam) for initiating this book review symposium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In democracies where the executive has bill initiation powers and controls the legislative agenda, most laws enacted should come from executive-initiated bills. In Chile's strong presidential system where the executive has broad legislative powers, one in three laws enacted are legislator-initiated. We postulate 5 hypotheses on the effect of the attributes of the authors of a bill on its success. We test them using sequential logit models, to distinguish between partial and overall success (passing the original chamber and getting enacted, respectively). We utilise the 6005 legislator-initiated bills introduced in the Chamber of Deputies of Chile (1990–2018) – 15.2% of those bills passed the chamber and 8.1% were enacted. Bills concurrently authored by government and opposition legislators are more likely to pass. Having more authors increases a bill' chances of passing in the first chamber but not the changes of overall passage. A higher presence of first-term legislators reduces the chances of passage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many North American Protestant circles, especially those with Baptist or Free Church roots, the notion of the total separation of church and state is presented as the ideal to be attained in all church and state relations. We are told that the state should have no legislative power to ordain anything in relation to church doctrine or practice, and that the church should be entirely excluded from all political, secular, or state actions. In this paper, we are going to suggest that such an approach to church–state relations (even though some might think that it flows from or is necessary for democracy) is, in fact, impossible in a true democracy. We will first consider the nature of the church and the state, and present three principles that Maritain suggests are first principles in this debate. We will then look at the classical notion of the "Citizen". We will conclude by arguing that based upon the nature of a citizen, of the church, and of the state, a strict separation of church and state is, in fact, impossible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the relationship between state sovereign immunity, standing doctrine, and Article III jurisdiction in recent judicial decisions, highlighting how these doctrines have been used to limit Congress's substantive legislative power.

Copyright of Alauddin Law Development Journal is the property of Alauddin Law Development Journal (ALDEV) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As a result of the successful devolution referendum in 1997 and the passing of the Scotland Act 1998, several legislative powers were devolved from the Government of the United Kingdom to the new Scottish Parliament including responsibility for sport, health and education. In consideration of this initial constitutional change, and subsequent amendments to taxation and welfare, this country profile provides an overview of how sport is organised and governed in Scotland, including the evolving trends in sport and physical activity policy. The aim is to analyse sport and physical activity policy in Scotland and to explore the wider social, political and economic challenges that impact upon its successful enactment. The profile begins with a historical evaluation of sport in Scotland and the key policy developments that have shaped it across the 20th and 21st century. This is followed by an evaluation of the current politics, structure and funding of sport in Scotland. In building upon those evaluations, three significant and inter-connected contemporary issues in Scottish sport are critically analysed. Whilst there are other relevant contemporary issues worthy of critique, we contend that (1) mega sport event legacies; (2) equality and inequality in sports participation and, (3) health inequalities are the most relevant to the Scottish Governments wider policy agenda and the role of sport and physical activity within it. Finally, a summary of the key findings is presented alongside recommendations for future research in sport and physical activity in Scotland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to highlight the key parameters of the parliament capacity as an institution of the political system as illustrated by studying the process of exercising state power in modern Ukraine. The strengthening of threats to the national security of Ukraine, which occurred since the beginning of the full-scale armed aggression against our state, has actualized, among other things, the problems of the institutional stability of its political system and the institutional capacity of its legislative power institution. To date, as an important component for completing the democratic transformation of the political system, mainly the institutial capacity of civil society institutions is considered in the Ukrainian research space, as highlighted in the articles by M. Stasyshyna, A. Kostenko, K. Petrenko et al. Methods used in the study: the analysis of the specified components of institutial capacity can be implemented based on the application of the research directions provisions of the new institutionalism of political science: international institutionalism, normative institutionalism and sociological institutionalism; and institutional capacity – based on the application of the research directions provisions of institutional studies in economics and political science and the new institutionalism of political science: classical (old) institutionalism, structural institutionalism and economic institutionalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The assignment of legislative power over mineral resources is a highly contentious issue in federal constitutional design. This article aims to shed light on this issue by examining the assignment and exercise of legislative powers over mineral resources in the Ethiopian Federation. A qualitative research approach was used which included analysis of laws, examining documents and in-depth interviews. The legal framework, policy documents, and decisions of government officials relating to legislative authority over mineral resources were scrutinized. Furthermore, interviews were conducted with key stakeholders involved in the matter to gain an understanding of the actual challenges and difficulties associated with the exercise of this power. An integrated data analysis approach is used. According to the analysis, the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia lacks clarity regarding legislative power over mineral resources. The study also reveals significant gaps in the institutional and legal frameworks governing the exercise of legislative power over mineral resources. These gaps have also resulted in the development of a legal framework that contradicts the principles laid out in the Constitution. The findings highlight the need to address the legal and practical challenges within the Ethiopian Federation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Parliamentary speeches are an important communication channel for political parties. A growing amount of literature suggests that parties use them to send policy signals in party competition. Although this perspective has become more popular in the literature, there is a lack of studies that focus on issue competition. I take a step towards closing this research gap by using a text‐as‐data approach to analyze parliamentary speeches in the Austrian Nationalrat. The data set consists of more than 56,700 speeches given by MPs between 2002 and 2019. I apply a semi‐supervised technique to classify the speeches at sentence level into 20 issue categories. The analysis shows that, despite the constraining parliamentary context (e.g., legislative agenda), parties put comparatively strong emphasis on their issue preferences. The magnitude of this effect, however, depends on a party's legislative agenda‐setting power. These findings confirm the presence and specific nature of issue competition in parliamentary speeches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Committee chairs hold crucial positions in the legislative process and can push or quell legislative initiatives. While extant studies examine the formal powers and legislative consequences of committee chairs, we know less about their appointment. We examine who ruling parties (principal) appoint to committee chairs (agent) in order to minimize the risk of policy moving away from government positions. Using data from Japan (2003–2017) on the LDP, we test expectations derived from the principal‐agent framework, conditional on committee type. Japan makes an ideal case to study intraparty chair appointments due to its coalitions' office‐allocation patterns. We find that the party leadership appoints as chairs ideologically close MPs to committees with jurisdiction on high policy. However, we find no effect for chair appointments on particularistic committees. Using additional data on bill‐amendment rates, we emphasize the legislative consequences of political appointments in the legislative process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The law governing local legislatures' delegations to local executives is a mess. Nondelegation doctrine, as applied to the state legislatures' delegations, has at least a coherent (if empirically dubious) formal logic in classic ideas about separation of powers. When applied to local governments, however, the logic underlying this doctrine disintegrates. In the context of state legislatures' delegations, the doctrine rests on the notion that the state constitution intended the state legislature, as the most democratically accountable representative of the state people, to take direct and inalienable responsibility for major policy decisions, leaving only the "details" of "implementation" to be decided by executive officials. This reasoning is incoherent in the local government context. Many of local governments' most important legislative powers are derived from statutory delegations enacted by the state legislature, refuting any prohibition on that body's delegating "legislative powers. " Further, that delegated power is carried out by unicameral local legislatures exercising a mix of both legislative and executive powers in defiance of state constitutional rules requiring bicameral legislatures to turn over implementation to executive officials. Ignoring these realities, state courts routinely enforce some version of the nondelegation doctrine against local governments without differentiating between local and state delegations, sometimes even senselessly relying on separation-of-powers logic that makes little sense at the local level. This Article attempts to bring some coherence to the law governing local delegations by recognizing that limits on local delegation have nothing to do with state constitutional separation of powers. Instead, those limits rest on statutory presumptions that ought to be crafted in light of the peculiarities of local legislatures. Unlike some state legislatures or Congress, local governments regularly lack the partisan competition necessary to support jurisdiction-wide policy platforms. Local legislators, therefore, tend to adopt parochial policies that ignore jurisdiction-wide costs and benefits, including mutual deference to each legislator's exclusion of locally costly infrastructure or land uses from their district and excessive deference to incumbent entitlement holders like vendors, contractors, public employees, and neighborhood associations. This Article argues that state courts should recognize that, in contrast to local legislators, mayors, county executives, and city managers have broader name recognition and greater capacity to mobilize the voting public on behalf of jurisdiction-wide considerations. Nondelegation canons that impede local legislative bodies from delegating broad policy-making power to such unitary executives, therefore, undermine rather than strengthen democratic accountability. Rather than try to clone state-level nondelegation doctrine at the local level, judge-made local government doctrines ought to strengthen the hand of these jurisdiction-wide executives, not undermine them with gratuitous impediments like local nondelegation doctrines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article deals with the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the principles of conventionality. It discusses the legitimacy of the individual, the intensity of control, the conforming interpretation, the margin of national appreciation, and the control ex officio and in the abstract. It also mentions the importance of complying with international norms and the responsibility of the Executive and Legislative powers in preventing the violation of international treaties and agreements. It talks about the control of conventionality within the scope of the inter-American human rights system and mentions relevant cases and jurisprudence. Additionally, it analyzes the influence of international courts on the domestic law of countries and the importance of conventionality control. [Extracted from the article]

Objective/context: The study aimed to analyze the debate among Brazilian women senators during the impeachment trial of Dilma Rousseff in 2016. Methodology: Elements of discourse analysis were applied to investigate the main question: How did the debate develop among women senators, considering the ideological spectrum of the party and their position on the impediment (favorable or contrary)? The analysis presents a political-ideological profile of women senators, the arguments used by them in the debate, and the different uses of the defense of democracy. Conclusions: The left-wing women senators were more diligent and repeated their arguments more frequently to increase their discursive visibility. They also addressed the non-existence of a crime of responsibility, a condition to initiate an impeachment process. Women senators from the right and the center, on the other hand, resorted to rhetorical models to reiterate that the then-president of the Republic was no longer in a position to maintain a parliamentary base to support her government. The senators of this group also stated that the investigations demonstrated the use of schemes to irresponsibly disguise public accounts, exclusively with a view to Rousseff's reelection. Originality: It is relevant to highlight the original fact that this is an analysis of the impediment of a woman in the office of President of the Republic from the female perspective of the parliamentary body of the Senate, the institution in charge of judging the impeachment process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent times, modernising trends towards an open state model have led to the transformation of public institutions, including parliament. This new approach is based on the axes of transparency, accountability and participation in order to improve the relationship/communication between parliament, and citizens and to strengthen its democratic legitimacy. This article aims to investigate this issue by assessing the transparency and citizen participation on the websites of the lower houses of national parliaments in Latin America to determine whether they are limited to complying with the requirements of the regulations or whether they go further and, therefore, move towards a true culture of open parliament. To address this question, an analytical framework has been generated that is composed of four dimensions (widely recognised in the academic literature) to which a series of indicators are linked: information about parliament (19 indicators); information about parliamentary organisation, functioning and activity (19 indicators); economic and contractual information (17 indicators); and communication and relationship with citizens (30 indicators). In short, the results of the research will provide a diagnosis of the situation that will help to verify that an open parliamentary style has not yet been fully established in Latin America, and also to make a series of reasonable recommendations for developing this new model of lower house. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the Constitutional Court's Order 177/2022, of December 19, which constitutes an unprecedented resolution by suspending the processing of two legislative amendments and preventing the Senate from fully exercising its legislative power in a legislative reform on the appointment of constitutional judges. The Constitutional Court allowed two judges to intervene in the deliberation and ruling on their own recusal, jeopardizing the right to an impartial court. In admitting the amparo appeal, the Constitutional Court issued a decision on the merits by paralyzing the legislative procedure with a lack of prudence and respect for parliamentary autonomy despite compliance with the Senate's Rules of Procedure and the guarantees of the rights of senators in the legislative procedure. The Constitutional Court has created a new way of prior review of constitutionality not contemplated in either the Constitution or the Constitutional Court Organic Law, authorizing each deputy or senator individually to request the Constitutional Court to suspend a bill parliamentary processing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective/Context: This article studies the political responsibility of the Extraordinary Congress of 1847 in the development of the Bolivian Revolution of that year. It was summoned by the government of José de Ballivián (1841-1847) to authorize him to wage a possible war with Peru, in which the notion of national independence was associated with that of mercantile liberty and which sought to resolve a long-standing tariff dispute that could have implications for territorial expansion. Since this gathering took place in the context of the loss of political and social capital of the Executive, it is hypothesized that the effort of the Presidency to pacify Bolivia internally through an international war, posed in terms of patriotic unity, made it possible for the Congress to act as the promoter of the Revolution and to empower itself as the governing body. The revolutionary legitimizing argument was built on the basis, on the one hand, of the discussions among the representatives on the distribution of the powers of the State with the Executive; on the other hand, of the fear of the population that the armed solution would expose Bolivians to commercial, territorial and freedom losses and, even, to the deprivation of independence. Originality: This study presents a new perspective on the political leadership exercised by the Congress, first, by contradicting the cliché on the governmental omniscience of the Executive and, second, by showing the leading role of the representatives in the promotion of political and constitutional use of arms, as opposed to the cliché of a public life defined by military caudillos or by caudillista militarism. Methodology: Through a theoretical interweaving of neo-constitutionalism and legal sociology, together with a method of conceptual history, the article identifies the actors and parties of the Revolution, their motivations and reciprocal relations, their action protocol, and their initiatives aimed at both pacifying and promoting the Revolution. Conclusions: The leadership of the Legislative in the fall of Ballivián through the revolutionary solution shows the intention of the former to preserve the constituent and law-creating conscience to which Bolivia's republican existence was owed. Likewise, the role of the congressmen in the appeal of constitutional armed violence--citizenship in arms--helps to clarify the dynamics of institutional and social legitimization and delegitimization of the revolutionary leadership in the 19th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Derecho Politico is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

How should patent legislative power be allocated between central and local governments in order to construct a patent system conducive to promoting innovation? A comparative analysis of the models of the U.S. and China sheds light on this question. The early American states established their patent systems before the formation of the federal system, but the U.S. Constitution arrogated patent legislative power to the federal government, ending the era of decentralized patent systems. This centralized structure ensures uniformity in rules but migfit hinder the ystem !r adaptability and ability to experiment. In contrast, as China'spatent ystem evolved, its patent legislative power spread from the central to the local governments. This shift led to the coexistence of dual-levelpatent legislative structure. Currently, twenty-nine out of thirty-one province-level authorities (93.5%) and twenty-one out of323 city-level authorities with local legislative power (6.5%) have established localpatent laws. China's patent ystem is not entirely decentralized but rather, semi-decentralized, as the locales not only implement their localpatent laws but also must enforce the central government's national patent laws. China's semidecentralized patent legislation model embodies significant features of cooperative federalism, where the central and local governments share the nationalpower to handle affairs and collaborate to address issues. Yet, the central government maintains a dominant position in this cooperative relationship, as a consequence of China's unitary state structure. Compared to the current centralized patent legislation model in the U.S., China's semi-decentralized patent legislation model has the advantage of making statutory law more adaptable to local specificities and promoting local competition and institutional innovation. However, it also faces challenges, such as increased costs due to inconsistency; efficiency decline stemming from rent-seeking behaviors; and the risk that localprotectionism will create anti-competitive effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]