Yahoo Canada Web Search

Search results

  1. People also ask

  2. The counter-majoritarian difficulty (sometimes counter-majoritarian dilemma) is a perceived problem with judicial review of legislative (or popularly-created) laws. As the term suggests, some oppose or see a problem with the judicial branch's ability to invalidate, overrule, or countermand laws that reflect the will of the majority.

  3. The problem posed by an unelected Supreme Court holding Congress’s laws to be unconstitutional and void has been described as the “counter-majoritarian difficulty.” 3 Footnote Alexander M. Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics 16–23 (1962). Bickel noted: W]hen the Supreme Court declares ...

  4. Sep 9, 2012 · The counter-majoritarian difficulty may be the best known problem in constitutional theory. The phrase is attributed to Alexander Bickel—a Yale Law School Professor—who is said to have introduced it in his famous book The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics .

  5. The apparent tension between judicial review and the democratic process—what Alexander Bickel dubbed the “countermajoritarian difficulty”—has been the focal point of modern constitutional scholarship.

  6. Jul 20, 2015 · Discussions about the democratic legitimacy of judicial review of legislation are usually framed in terms of the so called ‘counter-majoritarian’ difficulty, the idea that judicial review is a deviant institution in a democracy.

  7. Jan 7, 2013 · The American Supreme Court’s most prominent normative difficulty, the countermajoritarian (CM) difficulty, captures two fundamental aspects of democratic government: majoritarianism and electoral accountability. 1 The majoritarianism aspect presents the difficulty of an unelected Court that rules in a specific controversy against the current ...

  8. Nov 10, 2008 · The “countermajoritarian difficulty,” first formulated by Alexander Bickel almost fifty years ago, has been a profoundly influential starting point for those who critically examine the relationship between democracy and constitutional judicial review.

  1. People also search for