Ad
related to: different methods of interpreting the constitution
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Originalism consists of a family of different theories of constitutional interpretation and can refer to original intent or original meaning. [2] Critics of originalism often turn to the competing concept of the Living Constitution, which asserts that a constitution should evolve and be interpreted based on the context of current times.
Judicial interpretation is the way in which the judiciary construes the law, particularly constitutional documents, legislation and frequently used vocabulary.This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review.
The Constitution is referred to as the living law of the land as it is transformed according to necessities of the time and the situation. [2] Some supporters of the living method of interpretation, such as professors Michael Kammen and Bruce Ackerman, refer to themselves as organicists. [3] [4] [5] [6]
Theories of constitutional interpretation are different ways of interpreting the Constitution of the United States. Pages in category "Theories of constitutional interpretation" The following 10 pages are in this category, out of 10 total.
Systematic interpretation: considering the context of provisions, if only by acknowledging in which chapter a provision is listed. Teleological interpretation: considering the purpose of the statute (Latin: ratio legis), as it appears from legislative history, or other observations. It is controversial [citation needed] whether there is a ...
The subject concerns the scope of power of the United States federal government compared to the individual states and the fundamental rights of individuals. The ultimate authority upon the interpretation of the Constitution and the constitutionality of statutes, state and federal, lies with the Supreme Court of the United States.
The purposive approach (sometimes referred to as purposivism, [1] purposive construction, [2] purposive interpretation, [3] or the modern principle in construction) [4] is an approach to statutory and constitutional interpretation under which common law courts interpret an enactment (a statute, part of a statute, or a clause of a constitution) within the context of the law's purpose.
The need for a comprehensive guide to the interpretation of the Constitution was apparent to Congress from early in the 20th century. In 1911, the Senate Manual contained the United States Constitution and Amendments with citations to decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning constitutional law. [4]