Article

LA LEGITIMIDAD DE LOS TRIBUNALES SUPREMOS Y SUS ESTRATEGIAS COMUNICATIVAS. EL CASO DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE EE.UU.

Estudios Constitucionales 01/2009; DOI: 10.4067/S0718-52002009000100008
Source: DOAJ

ABSTRACT Los jueces adquieren cada vez mayor poder en la determinación de las grandes decisiones de los sistemas políticos. Para sustentar esa mayor intervencióncuentan solamente, como dice El Federalista, con su poder de convicción. El es el que hace que sus decisiones sean obedecidas y, así, el modo en que construyen su legitimidad política adquiere un rol esencial. Los tribunales administran este capital por medio de estrategias comunicativas que definen su posición institucional y los relacionan con los restantes actores del sistema político. A través del estudio de la Corte Suprema de los EE.UU. analizaremos los distintos elementos simbólicos que se encuentran en juego en el posicionamiento de los Tribunales Superiores como actores clave del sistema institucional actual.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
90 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In Mara'abe v. Prime Minister of Israel (September 2005), Israel's High Court addressed the effect which it should give to the International Court's Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in Occupied Palestinian Territory advisory opinion. This had declared the wall illegal but, while affirming that it shared the International Court of Justice's normative rulings, the High Court reiterated that it thought the wall a lawful security measure. Rather than dissect the substantive treatment of the issues involved, this article examines the structure and rhetorical techniques employed by President Barak in his leading judgment in Mara'abe . He effected a skilful practical disregard of the International Court's normative findings through an elision of argument by relying on the doctrine of res judicata —a concept that has no relevance whatsoever to advisory opinions.
    Chinese Journal of International Law 07/2006; DOI:10.1093/chinesejil/jml021 · 0.58 Impact Factor
  • The Yale Law Journal 04/1996; 105(6). DOI:10.2307/797296 · 3.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Marc Galanter's comments have focused our attention on public mistrust of lawyers as one example of the larger issue of public mistrust of the law and the legal system. I would like to elaborate on his remarks by describing what structured interviews with members of the public tell us about the public's perception of the law, legal authorities, and the legal system. Instead of focusing directly on lawyers, I will talk about research focusing on the public's view of the courts and legal authorities. However, discussions of the courts and legal authorities are clearly intertwined with public views about lawyers.

Preview (2 Sources)

Download
0 Downloads
Available from