The Failures of Others Justifying Institutional Expansion in Comparative Public and International Law
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 December 2025
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Failures of OthersJustifying Institutional Expansion in Comparative Public and International Law, pp. 241 - 264Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2026
- Creative Commons
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/
References
Abbott, Kenneth W. and Biersteker, Thomas J. (eds.), Informal Governance in World Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2024).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, Bruce, Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism (Yale University Press, 2007).Google Scholar
Andrassy, Juraj, ‘Uniting for Peace’ (1956) 50:3 The American Journal of International Law 563–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antkowiak, Thomas M., ‘Remedial Approaches to Human Rights Violations: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Beyond’ (2007) 46 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 351–419.Google Scholar
Avant, Deborah D., Finnemore, Martha and Sell, Susan, ‘Who Governs the Globe?’, in id. (eds.), Who Governs the Globe? (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avbelj, Matej and Komárek, Jan (eds.), Constitutional Pluralism in the European Union and Beyond (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2012).Google Scholar
Backes, Chris and van der Veen, Gerrit, ‘Urgenda: The Final Judgment of the Dutch Supreme Court’ (2020) 17:3 Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law 307–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Backes, Chris and van der Veen, Gerrit, Administratiefrechtelijke Beslissingen 2018/417.Google Scholar
Bandopadhyay, Saptarishi, All Is Well: Catastrophe and the Making of the Normal State (Oxford University Press, 2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Nick W., The Principles of Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Rebecca, ‘Accountability for Crimes Against the Rohingya: Possibilities for the General Assembly Where the Security Council Fails’ (2019) 17:3 Journal of International Criminal Justice 557–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bárd, Petra and van Ballegooij, Wouter, ‘Judicial Independence as a Precondition for Mutual Trust? The CJEU in Minister for Justice and Equality v. LM.’ (2020) 9(3) New Journal of European Criminal Law 353–65.Google Scholar
Barkow, Rachel E., ‘More Supreme Than Court: The Fall of the Political Question Doctrine and the Rise of Judicial Supremacy’ (2002) 102 Columbia Law Review 237–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Siman-Tov, Ittai, ‘Semiprocedural Judicial Review’ (2012) 6:3 Legisprudence 271–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Hartmut, ‘Der Bundeszwang in der bundesstaatlichen Ordnung des Grundgesetzes’ (2019) Revista Catalana de Dret Públic 1–20.Google Scholar
Baxi, Upendra, ‘Taking Suffering Seriously: Social Action Litigation in the Supreme Court of India’ (1985) 6 Third World Legal Studies 107–32.Google Scholar
Benz, Arthur, ‘Demokratisches Regieren im Föderalismus: Neue Literatur zu einem alten Thema’ (2019) 64 Neue Politische Literatur 513–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergkamp, Lucas, ‘The Dutch Supreme Court’s Climate Judgment: Its Consequences and Implications for Business – Revolution Through Litigation’ (2020) 29:3 European Energy and Environmental Law Review 89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergkamp, Lucas and Stone, Scott, ‘The Trojan Horse of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change: How Multi-level, Non-hierarchical Governance Poses a Threat to Constitutional Government’ (2015) 4 Environmental Liability 119–40.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Anya and Rodríguez, Cristina‚ ‘The Accountable Bureaucrat’ (2023) 132 Yale Law Journal 1600–90.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Anya and Staszewski, Glen, ‘Judicial Populism’ (2021) 106 Minnesota Law Review 283–351.Google Scholar
Bhuwania, Anuj, Courting the People: Public Interest Litigation in Post-Emergency India (Cambridge University Press, 2017).Google Scholar
Bignami, Francesca, ‘Rethinking the Legal Foundations of the European Constitutional Order: The Lessons of the New Historical Research’ (2012) 28:5 American University International Law Review 1311–35.Google Scholar
Bilchitz, David and Landau, David (eds.), The Evolution of the Separation of Powers: Between the Global North and the Global South (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilgin, Pinar and Morton, Adam David, ‘Historicising Representations of “Failed States”: Beyond the Cold-War Annexation of the Social Sciences?’ (2002) 23:1 Third World Quarterly 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binder, Christina, ‘Uniting for Peace Resolution (1950)’ (2017), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Public Law (Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Blokker, Niels M., ‘International Organizations or Institutions, Implied Powers’, in Peters, A. and Wolfrum, R. (eds.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press, 2008).Google Scholar
Bobek, Michal and Kosař, David, ‘Global Solutions, Local Damages: A Critical Study in Judicial Councils in Central and Eastern Europe’ (2014) 15:7 German Law Journal 1257–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin and Spieker, Luke Dimitrios, ‘Transformative Constitutionalism in Luxembourg: How the Court Can Support Democratic Transitions’ (2023) 29:2 Columbia Journal of European Law 65–91.Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin, Strukturwandel des öffentlichen Rechts. Entstehung und Demokratisierung der europäischen Gesellschaft (Suhrkamp, 2022).Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin et al., ‘A Potential Constitutional Moment for the European Rule of Law: The Importance of Red Lines’, in von Bogdandy, Armin et al. (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States (Springer, 2021), pp. 385–401.10.1007/978-3-662-62317-6_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin, ‘Principles of a Systemic Deficiencies Doctrine: How to Protect Checks and Balances in the Member States’ (2020) 57:3 Common Market Law Review 705–40.10.54648/COLA2020690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin et al., ‘Protecting EU Values: Reverse Solange and the Rule of Law Framework’, in Jakab, András and Kochenov, Dimitry (eds.), The Enforcement of EU Law and Values: Ensuring Member States’ Compliance (Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 218–33.Google Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin and Ioannidis, Michael, ‘Systemic Deficiency in the Rule of Law: What It Is, What Has Been Done, What Can Be Done’ (2014) 51:1 Common Market Law Review 59–96.10.54648/COLA2014003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Bogdandy, Armin and Venzke, Ingo, ‘In Whose Name? An Investigation of International Courts’ Public Authority and Its Democratic Justification’ (2012) 23:1 European Journal of International Law 7–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, Samuel, ‘“Airbrushed Out of the Constitutional Canon”: The Evolving Understanding of Giles v. Harris, 1903–1925’ (2009) 107:5 Michigan Law Review 853–79.Google Scholar
Brenton, Scott, ‘Does Federalism Enhance Representative Democracy? Perpetual Reform and Shifting Power in a Divided Belgium’ (2022) 31:2 Journal of Contemporary European Studies 1–19.Google Scholar
Brouwer, Evelien, ‘Mutual Trust and the Dublin Regulation: Protection of Fundamental Rights in the EU and the Burden of Proof’ (2013) 9 Utrecht Law Review 135–47.10.18352/ulr.218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, Allen and Keohane, Robert O., ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions’, in Babic, Jovan and Bojanic, Petar (eds.), World Governance: Do We Need It, Is It Possible, What Could It (All) Mean? (Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 214–46.Google Scholar
Buchanan, James M., ‘Market Failure and Political Failure’ (1988) 8:1 Cato Journal 1–15.Google Scholar
Bulmer, Elliot W., ‘Federalism: International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer 12’ (2017), 2nd ed., International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.Google Scholar
Búrca, Gráinne de, Reframing Human Rights in a Turbulent Era (Oxford University Press, 2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Búrca, Gráinne de, ‘Human Rights Experimentalism’ (2017) 111:2 American Journal of International Law 277–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Búrca, Gráinne de, ‘The European Court of Justice and the International Legal Order After Kadi’ (2010) 51:1 Harvard Journal of International Law 1–50.Google Scholar
Búrca, Gráinne de and Scott, Joanne, ‘Introduction’, in Id. (eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU and the US (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2006) 1–12.Google Scholar
Çalı, Başak, ‘“To me, fair friend, you can never be old”, William Shakespeare, “Sonnet 104”: ECHR at 70 Rudolf Bernhardt Lecture, 2020’ (2022) 81:4 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht/Heidelberg Journal of International Law 895–916.10.17104/0044-2348-2021-4-895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çali, Başak and Koch, Anne, ‘Foxes Guarding the Foxes? The Peer Review of Human Rights Judgments by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe’ (2014) 14:2 Human Rights Law Review 301–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Call, Charles T., ‘The Fallacy of the “Failed State”’ (2008) 29:8 Third World Quarterly 1491–507.10.1080/01436590802544207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, Jonathan and Arbuthnott, George, Failures of State: The Inside Story of Britain’s Battle with Coronavirus (Mudlark/Harper Collins, 2021).Google Scholar
Canor, Iris, ‘Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law’, in von Bogdandy, Armin et al. (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States (Springer, 2021), pp. 183–206.10.1007/978-3-662-62317-6_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, John, ‘U. N. Response to Government Oppression’ (1968) 3:1 The International Lawyer 102–8.Google Scholar
Carolan, Eoin, The New Separation of Powers: A Theory for the Modern State (Oxford University Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carswell, Andrew J., ‘Unblocking the UN Security Council: The Uniting for Peace Resolution’ (2013) 18:3 Journal of Conflict and Security Law 453–80.10.1093/jcsl/krt016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavallaro, James L. and Brewer, Stephanie Erin, ‘Reevaluating Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Twenty-First Century: The Case of the Inter-American Court’ (2008) 102:4 American Journal of International Law 768–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cepeda Espinosa, Manuel José and Landau, David, ‘A Broad Read of Ely: Political Process Theory for Fragile Democracies’ (2021) 19:2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 548–68.10.1093/icon/moab039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cepeda Espinosa, Manuel José and Landau, David, ‘Colombian Constitutional Law: Leading Cases’ (Oxford University Press, 2017).Google Scholar
Cepeda Espinosa, Manuel José, ‘The Constitutional Protection of IDPs in Colombia’, in Rivadeneira, Rodolfo Arango (ed.), Judicial Protection of Internally Displaced Persons: The Colombian Experience (The Brookings Institution-University of Bern Project on Internal Displacement, 2009), pp. 1–48.Google Scholar
Cerna, Christina M., ‘The Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights’ (2004) 16:1 Florida Journal of International Law 195–211.Google Scholar
Chamon, Merijn, ‘Implied Exclusive Powers in the CJEU’s Post-Lisbon Jurisprudence: The Continued Development of the ERTA Doctrine’ (2018) 55:4 Common Market Law Review 1101–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chayes, Abram, ‘The Role of the Judge in Public Law Litigation’ (1976) 89 Harvard Law Review 1281–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenwi, Lillian, ‘Unpacking “Progressive Realisation”, Its Relation to Resources, Minimum Core and Reasonableness, and Some Methodological Considerations for Assessing Compliance’ (2013) 46:3 De Jure 742-–69.Google Scholar
Chilton, Adam and Versteeg, Mila, ‘Small-c Constitutional Rights’ (2022) 20:1 International Journal of Constitutional Law 141–76.10.1093/icon/moac004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chitalkar, Poorvi and Gauri, Varun, ‘India: Compliance with Orders on the Right to Food’, in Langford, Malcolm, Rodríguez-Garavito, César and Rossi, Julieta (eds.), Social Rights Judgments and the Politics of Compliance: Making It Stick (Cambridge University Press, 2017), pp. 288–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhry, Sujit, Khosla, Madhav and Mehta, Pratap Bhanu (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution (Oxford University Press, 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CoffeeJr., John C., Entrepreneurial Litigation: Its Rise, Fall, and Future (Harvard University Press, 2015).10.4159/9780674287075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CoffeeJr., John C., ‘Rescuing the Private Attorney General: Why the Model of the Lawyer as Bounty Hunter Is Not Working’ (1983) 42:2 Maryland Law Review 215–88.Google Scholar
Cohen, Benjamin V., The United Nations, Constitutional Developments, Growths, and Possibilities (Harvard University Press, 1961), pp. 18–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Joshua and Sabel, Charles F., ‘Directly‐Deliberative Polyarchy’ (1997) 3:4 European Law Journal 313–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen-Eliya, Moshe and Porat, Iddo, ‘American Balancing and German Proportionality: The Historical Origins’, in Bix, Brian and Spector, Horacio (eds.), Rights: Concepts and Contexts (Routledge, 2017), pp. 463–86.Google Scholar
Cohen-Eliya, Moshe and Porat, Iddo, ‘Proportionality and the Culture of Justification’ (2011) 59:2 The American Journal of Comparative Law 463–90.10.5131/AJCL.2010.0018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conable, Barber B., ‘Foreword’, in Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Growth (The World Bank, Washington D.C., 1989), pp. xi–15.Google Scholar
Costello, Cathryn and Mann, Itamar, ‘Border Justice: Migration and Accountability for Human Rights Violations’ (2020) 21:3 German Law Journal 311–34.10.1017/glj.2020.27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couzigou, Irène, ‘The Right to Self-Defence against Non-State Actors: Criteria of the “Unwilling or Unable” Test’ (2017) 77 Heidelberg Journal of International Law 53–55.Google Scholar
Croissant, Aurel, ‘Thailand: The Vicious Cycle of Civilian Government and Military Rule’, in id. (ed.), Comparative Politics of Southeast Asia (Springer, 2nd ed., 2022), pp. 315–59.10.1007/978-3-031-05114-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, Frank, Theories of Democracy (Routledge, 2002).10.4324/9780203466247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czepek, Jakub, ‘The Application of the Pilot Judgment Procedure and Other Forms of Handling Large-Scale Dysfunctions in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2018) 20 International Community Law Review 347–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, Tom, The Alchemists: Questioning Our Faith in Courts as Democracy-Builders (Cambridge University Press, 2017).10.1017/9781108283731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damrosch, Lori F., ‘Gross and Systematic Human Rights Violations’, in Peters, Anne and Wolfrum, Rüdiger (eds.), 4 Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 597–603.Google Scholar
Dann, Philipp, ‘Liberal Constitutionalism and Postcolonialism in the South and Beyond: On Liberalism as an Open Source and the Insights of Decolonial Critiques’ (2022) 20:1 International Journal of Constitutional Law 1–12.Google Scholar
Dann, Philipp, The Law of Development Cooperation: A Comparative Analysis of the World Bank, the EU and Germany (Cambridge University Press, 2013).10.1017/CBO9781139097130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dann, Philipp, ‘Verfassungsgerichtliche Kontrolle gesetzgeberischer Rationalität’ (2010) 49:4 Der Staat 630–46.10.3790/staa.49.4.630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Danwitz, Luc, ‘Der Grundsatz des gegenseitigen Vertrauens zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten der EU. Eine wertebasierte Garantie der Einheit und Wirksamkeit des Unionsrechts’ (2020) 61:1 Europarecht 61-88.Google Scholar
Davis, Dennis M., ‘Separation of Powers: Juristocracy or Democracy’ (2016) 133 South African Law Journal 258–70.Google Scholar
De Oliveira, Emerson A. B., ‘The Unconstitutional State of Affairs in Brazil’s Prisons’, in Becak, Rubens and Lima, Jairo (eds.), The Unwritten Brazilian Constitution: Human Rights in the Supremo Tribunal Federal (Lexington Book, 2021), pp. 233–46.Google Scholar
Derwort, Pim, Jager, Nicolas and Newig, Jens, ‘Towards Productive Functions? A Systematic Review of Institutional Failure, Its Causes and Consequences’ (2019) 52:2 Policy Sciences 281–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, Ulrike and Wolfrum, Rüdiger, The European Court of Human Rights Overwhelmed by Applications: Problems and Possible Solutions (Springer, 2009).10.1007/978-3-540-93960-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind, Responsive Judicial Review (Oxford University Press, 2023).10.1093/oso/9780192865779.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind and Landau, David, Abusive Constitutional Borrowing: Legal Globalization and the Subversion of Liberal Democracy (Oxford University Press, 2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind and Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Ely in the World: The Global Legacy of Democracy and Distrust Forty Years On’ (2021) 19:2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 427–38.10.1093/icon/moab041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind, ‘The Forms, Functions, and Varieties of Weak(ened) Judicial Review’ (2019) 17:3 International Journal of Constitutional Law 904–930.10.1093/icon/moz059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind and Landau, David, ‘Competitive Democracy and the Constitutional Minimum Core’, in Ginsburg, Tom and Huq, Aziz (eds.), Assessing Constitutional Performance (Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 268–92.Google Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind, ‘The Core Case for Weak-Form Judicial Review’ (2016) 38:6 Cardozo Law Review 2193–232.Google Scholar
Dixon, Rosalind, ‘Creating Dialogue about Socioeconomic Rights: Strong-form versus Weak-form Judicial Review Revisited’ (2007) 5:3 International Journal of Constitutional Law 391–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorf, Michael C. and Sabel, Charles F., ‘A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism’ (1998) 98:2 Columbia Law Review 267–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupuy, Pierre-Marie, ‘The Constitutional Dimension of the Charter of the United Nations Revisited’ (1997) 1:1 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online xix–33.10.1163/187574197X00038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duranti, Marco, The Conservative Human Rights Revolution: European Identity, Transnational Politics, and the Origins of the European Convention (Oxford University Press, 2016).Google Scholar
Dyzenhaus, David, ‘Legal Theory in the Collapse of Weimar: Contemporary Lessons?’ (1997) 91 American Political Science Review 121–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin, Can the European Court of Human Rights Shape European Public Order? (Cambridge University Press, 2021).10.1017/9781108608794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggleston, Neil W. and Elbogen, Amanda, ‘The Trump Administration and the Breakdown of Intra-Executive Legal Process’ (2018) 127 The Yale Law Journal 825–47.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Theodore and Yeazell, Stephen C., ‘The Ordinary and the Extraordinary in Institutional Litigation’ (1980) 93:3 Harvard Law Review 465–517.10.2307/1340545CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ely, John Hart, Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review (Harvard University Press, 1980).Google Scholar
von Engelhardt, Marie, Dealing with Fragile States: The Law and Practice of International Development Organizations, PhD diss., Humboldt University, 2015, available at https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/18452/18078/engelhardt.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R., Making Rights Real: Activists, Bureaucrats, and the Creation of the Legalistic State (University of Chicago Press, 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epp, Charles R., The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective (University of Chicago Press, 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ermacora, Felix, ‘Procedures to Deal with Human Rights Violations: A Hopeful Start in the United Nations?’ (1974) 7 Human Rights Journal 670–89.Google Scholar
Eskridge, William N. Jr., ‘Relationships Between Formalism and Functionalism in Separation of Powers Cases’ (1998) 22:1 Harvard Law Review 21–9.Google Scholar
Fahner, Johannes Hendrik, Judicial Deference in International Adjudication: A Comparative Analysis (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020).10.5040/9781509932313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fassbender, Bardo, ‘The United Nations Charter as Constitution of the International Community’ (1998) 36 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 529–620.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, John and Pasquino, Pasquale, ‘The Law of the Exception: A Typology of Emergency Powers’ (2004) 2:2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 210–39.10.1093/icon/2.2.210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz, Octavio Luiz Motta, Health as a Human Right: The Politics and Judicialisation of Health in Brazil (Cambridge University Press, 2020).10.1017/9781108678605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figueroa Garcia-Herreros, Nicolas, A Critique of Populist Jurisprudence: Courts, Democracy, and Constitutional Change in Colombia and Venezuela, PhD diss., The New School, 2016.Google Scholar
Fischer Kuh, Katharina, ‘The Legitimacy of Judicial Climate Engagement’ (2019) 46:3 Ecology Law Quarterly 731–64.Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley, Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities (Harvard University Press, 1980).Google Scholar
Fish Hodgson, Timothy, ‘The Mysteriously Appearing and Disappearing Doctrine of Separation of Powers: Toward a Distinctly South Africa Doctrine for a More Radically Transformative Constitution’ (2018) 34:1 South African Journal on Human Rights 57–90.10.1080/02587203.2018.1442656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiss, Owen M., ‘Foreword: The Forms of Justice’ (1979) 93:1 Harvard Law Review 1–58.10.2307/1340507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, William A., ‘The Discretionary Constitution: Institutional Remedies and Judicial Legitimacy’ (1982) 91:4 The Yale Law Journal 635–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fombad, Charles Manga (ed.), The Separation of Powers in African Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2016).Google Scholar
Fowkes, James, ‘Normal Rights, Just New: Understanding the Judicial Enforcement of Socioeconomic Rights’ (2020) 68:4 The American Journal of Comparative Law 722–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowkes, James, ‘Transformative Constitutionalism and the Global South: The View from South Africa’, in von Bogdandy, Armin et al. (eds.), Transformative Constitutionalism in Latin America: A New Latin American Ius Commune (Oxford University Press, 2017), pp. 97–122.Google Scholar
Fowkes, James, Building the Constitution: The Practice of Constitutional Interpretation in Post-Apartheid South Africa (Cambridge University Press, 2016).10.1017/9781316403853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowkes, James, ‘Civil Procedure in Public Interest Litigation: Tradition, Collaboration and the Managerial Judge’ (2012) 1:3 Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law 235–53.10.7574/cjicl.01.03.54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, Thomas M., Recourse to Force: State Action Against Threats and Armed Attacks (Cambridge University Press, 2002).10.1017/CBO9780511494369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franck, Thomas M., ‘U.S. Foreign Policy and the U.N.’ (1986) 14 Denver Journal of International Law & Policy 159–70.Google Scholar
Frankenberg, Günter, ‘Constitutional Transfer: The IKEA Theory Revisited’ (2010) 8:3 International Journal of Constitutional Law 563–79.10.1093/icon/moq023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, Sam, Failed State: Why Nothing Works and How We Fix It (Pan Macmillan, 2024).Google Scholar
Fuller, Lon L. and Winston, Kenneth I., ‘The Forms and Limits of Adjudication’ (1978) 92:2 Harvard Law Review 353–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García Morales, María Jesús, ‘Bundeszwang und Sezession in Spanien: Der Fall Katalonien’ (2019) Die öffentliche Verwaltung 1–13.Google Scholar
Gardbaum, Stephen, ‘Comparative Political Process Theory’ (2020) 18:4 International Journal of Constitutional Law 1429–57.Google Scholar
Gardbaum, Stephen, The New Commonwealth Model of Constitutionalism: Theory and Practice (Cambridge University Press, 2013).10.1017/CBO9780511920806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gargarella, Roberto, The Law as a Conversation Among Equals (Cambridge University Press, 2022).10.1017/9781009105682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gargarella, Roberto, Latin American Constitutionalism, 1810–2010: The Engine Room of the Constitution (Oxford University Press, 2013).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937967.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gargarella, Roberto, ‘Dialogic Justice in the Enforcement of Social Rights: Some Initial Arguments’, in Yamin, Alicia Ely and Gloppen, Siri (eds.), Litigating Health Rights: Can Courts Bring More Justice to Health? (Harvard University Press, 2011), pp. 232–43.Google Scholar
Gauri, Varun, ‘Public Interest Litigation in India: Overreaching or Underachieving?’ (2009) The World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper 5109.10.1596/1813-9450-5109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauri, Varun and Brinks, Daniel M., Courting Social Justice: Judicial Enforcement of Social and Economic Rights in the Developing World (Cambridge University Press, 2008).10.1017/CBO9780511511240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiss, Robin, “Failed States”: Die normative Erfassung gescheiterter Staaten (Duncker & Humblot, 2005).Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom, Huq, Aziz and Landau, David, ‘The Comparative Constitutional Law of Presidential Impeachment’ (2021) 88 The University of Chicago Law Review 81–164.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom and Huq, Aziz, How to Save a Constitutional Democracy (University of Chicago Press, 2018).Google Scholar
Griffin, Stephen M., Broken Trust: Dysfunctional Government and Constitutional Reform (University Press of Kansas, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, Oren, ‘The Prohibition on Torture and the Limits of the Law’, in Levinson, Sanford (ed.), Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 229–56.Google Scholar
Gruffydd Jones, Branwen, ‘The Global Political Economy of Social Crisis: Towards a Critique of the “Failed State” Ideology’ (2008) 15:2 Review of International Political Economy 180–205.10.1080/09692290701869688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory on Law and Democracy (MIT Press, 1996).10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen, ‘Remarks on Dieter Grimm’s: Does Europe Need a Constitution’ (1995) 1 European Law Journal 303–7.10.1111/j.1468-0386.1995.tb00034.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Output-Legitimacy and Its Limitations in Constitutional Theory’, in Klafki, Anika (ed.), Patterns of Legitimacy (Nomos 2024), pp. 151–66.Google Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Combatting Malfunction or Optimizing Democracy? Lessons from Germany for a Comparative Political Process Theory’ (2021) 19:2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 492–514.10.1093/icon/moab043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Political Process Review: Beyond Distrust’ (2020) 18:4 International Journal of Constitutional Law 1458–65.10.1093/icon/moaa097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Beyond Legitimacy: Europe’s Crisis of Constitutional Democracy’, in Graber, Mark, Levinson, Sandy and Tushnet, Mark (eds.), Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? (Oxford University Press, 2018), pp. 277–95.Google Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Transformative Constitutionalism: Not Only in the Global South’ (2017) 65:3 American Journal of Comparative Law 527–65.10.1093/ajcl/avx016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, ‘Constitutional Legitimacy and the Separation of Powers in Africa: Looking forward’, in Fombad, Charles Manga (ed.), The Separation of Powers in African Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 385–9.Google Scholar
Hailbronner, Michaela, Traditions and Transformations: The Rise of German Constitutionalism (Oxford University Press, 2015).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198735427.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James and Jay, John, The Federalist Papers, Rossiter, Clinton (ed.) (Dutton/Signet, 2012).Google Scholar
Hammarskjöld, Dag, ‘Do We Need the United Nations?’ Address before the Students Association. Copenhagen, 2 May 1959, in Andrew Wellington Cordier, Wilder Foote and Max Harrelson (eds.) (1974) 4 Public Papers of the Secretaries-General of The United Nations 1958-1960.Google Scholar
Harms, Katharina, ‘Kompetenzen des Bundes aus der “Natur der Sache”?’ (1994) 33:3 Der Staat 409–28.Google Scholar
Heckman, Charles A., ‘Keeping Legal History Legal and Judicial Activism in Perspective: A Reply to Richard Pildes’ (2002) 19 Constitutional Commentary 625–44.Google Scholar
Hellwig, Timothy and Samuels, David, ‘Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes’ (2008) 38:1 British Journal of Political Science 65–90.10.1017/S0007123408000045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helman, Gerald B. and Ratner, Steven R., ‘Saving Failed States’ (1992–1993) 89 Foreign Policy 3–20.Google Scholar
Heri, Corina, Responsive Human Rights: Vulnerability, Ill-Treatment and the ECtHR (Hart Publishing, 2021).10.5040/9781509941261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzog, Roman and Gerken, Lüder, ‘Stoppt den Europäischen Gerichtshof’, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 8 September 2008, p. 8.Google Scholar
Hirschl, Ran, Comparative Matters: The Renaissance of Comparative Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press, 2014).Google Scholar
Hirschl, Ran, Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism (Harvard University Press, 2009).10.2307/j.ctv15d81nbCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas, ‘Leviathan’, Gaskin, John Charles Addison (ed.) (Oxford University Press, 2008).Google Scholar
Huneeus, Alexandra, ‘Reforming the State from Afar: Structural Reform Litigation at the Human Rights Courts’ (2015) 40:1 Yale Journal of International Law 1–40.Google Scholar
Imamović, Šejla, ‘Post-EU Accession to the ECHR: The Argument for Why the ECtHR Should Abandon the Bosphorus Doctrine’ (2024) 39:1 Utrecht Journal of International and European Law 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inman, Robert and Rubinfeld, Daniel L., Democratic Federalism: The Economics, Politics, and Law of Federal Governance (Princeton University Press, 2020).Google Scholar
Isiksel, Turkuler, Europe’s Functional Constitution: A Theory of Constitutionalism Beyond the State (Oxford University Press, 2016).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198759072.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Issacharoff, Samuel, Fragile Democracies: Contested Power in the Era of Constitutional Courts (Cambridge University Press, 2015).10.1017/CBO9781139839334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Issacharoff, Samuel and Pildes, Richard H., ‘Politics as Markets: Partisan Lockups of the Democratic Process’ (1998) 50:3 Stanford Law Review 643–717.10.2307/1229320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobsohn, Gary and Schor, Miguel (eds.), Comparative Constitutional Theory (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaffrelot, Christophe and Anil, Pratinav, India’s First Dictatorship: The Emergency, 1975–1977 (Oxford University Press, 2021).10.1093/oso/9780197577820.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Steven L. B., The Making of International Human Rights: The 1960s, Decolonization, and the Reconstruction of Global Values (Cambridge University Press, 2016).10.1017/CBO9781316282571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Anna-Bettina, Ausnahmeverfassungsrecht (Mohr Siebeck, 2020).10.1628/978-3-16-156413-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlan, Pamela S., ‘Politics by Other Means’ (1999) 85:8 Virginia Law Review 1697–724.10.2307/1073935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kavanagh, Aileen, The Collaborative Constitution (Cambridge University Press, 2023)10.1017/9781108680929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kavanagh, Aileen, ‘The Constitutional Separation of Powers’, in Dyzenhaus, David and Thorburn, Malcolm (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 221–39.Google Scholar
Kelley, Mark, ‘Saving 60(b)(5): The Future of Institutional Reform Litigation’ (2015) 125 The Yale Law Journal 272–312.Google Scholar
Kersbergen, Kees van and Verbeek, Bertjan, ‘The Politics of Subsidiarity in the European Union’ (1994) 32 Journal of Common Market Studies 215–36.10.1111/j.1468-5965.1994.tb00494.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khaitan, Tarunabh, ‘Guarantor (or “Fourth Branch”) Institutions’, in King, Jeff and Bellamy, Richard (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming).Google Scholar
Khosla, Madhav and Tushnet, Mark, ‘Courts, Constitutionalism, and State Capacity: A Preliminary Inquiry’ (2022) 70:1 The American Journal of Comparative Law 95–138.10.1093/ajcl/avac009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Jeff, Judging Social Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2012).10.1017/CBO9781139051750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsbury, Benedict and Donaldson, Megan, ‘Global Administrative Law’, in Peters, Anne and Wolfrum, Rüdiger (eds.), 4 Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 468 ff.Google Scholar
Klabbers, Jan, ‘The EJIL Foreword: The Transformation of International Organizations Law’ (2015) 26:1 European Journal of International Law 9–82.10.1093/ejil/chv009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klare, Karl E., ‘Legal Culture and Transformative Constitutionalism’ (1998) 14:1 South African Journal on Human Rights 146–88.10.1080/02587203.1998.11834974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klarman, Michael J., From Jim Crow to Civil Rights: The Supreme Court and the Struggle for Racial Equality (Oxford University Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Klarmann, Michael J., ’Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights Movement (Oxford University Press, 2007).10.1093/oso/9780195307467.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klatt, Matthias, ‘Positive Obligations Under the European Convention on Human Rights’ (2011) 71 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 691–718.Google Scholar
Kleinlein, Thomas, ‘The Procedural Approach of the European Court of Human Rights: Between Subsidiarity and Dynamic Evolution’ (2019) 68:1 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 91–110.10.1017/S0020589318000416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinlein, Thomas, ‘Consensus and Contestability: The ECtHR and the Combined Potential of European Consensus and Procedural Rationality Control’ (2017) 28:3 European Journal of International Law 871–93.10.1093/ejil/chx055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klonoff, Robert H., ‘The Decline of Class Actions’ (2017) 90 Washington University Law Review 729–838.Google Scholar
Kochenov, Dimitry, ‘Article 7: A Commentary on a Much Talked-About “Dead” Provision’, in von Bogdandy, Armin, et al. (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States (Springer, 2021), pp. 127–54.Google Scholar
Komesar, Neil K., Law’s Limits: Rule of Law and the Supply and Demand of Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
Komesar, Neil K., Imperfect Alternatives: Choosing Institutions in Law, Economics, and Public Policy (University of Chicago Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Krenn, Christoph, The Procedural and Organisational Law of the European Court of Justice: An Incomplete Transformation (Cambridge University Press, 2022).10.1017/9781009247924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian and White, Jonathan ‘Europe and the Transnational Politics of Emergency’ (2022) 29:6 Journal of European Public Policy 953–965.10.1080/13501763.2021.1916059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian, Emergency Powers of International Organizations: Between Normalization and Containment (Oxford University Press, 2019).10.1093/oso/9780198832935.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krisch, Nico, ‘Liquid Authority in Global Governance’ (2017) 9:2 International Theory 237–60.10.1017/S1752971916000269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, Mattias, ‘Constitutionalism and Experimentalist Governance’ (2012) 6:3 Regulation & Governance 401–9.10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01154.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, Mattias, ‘Institutionalising Socratic Contestation: The Rationalist Human Rights Paradigm, Legitimate Authority and the Point of Judicial Review’ (2008) 1:2 European Journal of Legal Studies 153–83.Google Scholar
Kumm, Mattias, ‘Who Is Afraid of the Total Constitution? Constitutional Rights as Principles and the Constitutionalization of Private Law,’ (2006) 7:4 German Law Journal pp. 341–69.10.1017/S2071832200004727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, Mattias, ‘The Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conflict: Constitutional Supremacy in Europe Before and After the Constitutional Treaty’ (2005) 11 European Law Journal 262–307.10.1111/j.1468-0386.2005.00260.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurban, Dilek, ‘Forsaking Individual Justice: The Implications of the European Court of Human Rights’ Pilot Judgment Procedure for Victims of Gross and Systematic Violations’ (2016), 16: 4 Human Rights Law Review pp. 731–69.10.1093/hrlr/ngw032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuwali, Dan, ‘The End of Humanitarian Intervention: Evaluation of the African Union’s Right of Intervention’ (2009) 9 African Journal on Conflict Resolution 41–61.Google Scholar
Kyritsis, Dimitrios, Where Our Protection Lies: Separation of Powers and Constitutional Review (Oxford University Press, 2017).10.1093/oso/9780199672257.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Joseph, ‘Process Scrutiny: Motivational Inquiry and Constitutional Rights’ (2019) 119:8 Columbia Law Review 2147–204.Google Scholar
Landau, David, ‘Institutional Failure and Intertemporal Theories of Judicial Role in the Global South’, in Bilchitz, David and Landau, David (eds.), The Evolution of the Separation of Powers: Between the Global North and the Global South (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018), pp. 31–56.Google Scholar
Landau, David, ‘A Dynamic Theory of Judicial Role’ (2014) 55:5 Boston College Law Review 1501–62.Google Scholar
Landau, David, ‘The Reality of Social Rights Enforcement’ (2012) 53:1 Harvard International Law 190–247.Google Scholar
Landau, David, ‘Political Institutions and Judicial Role in Comparative Constitutional Law’ (2010) 51:2 Harvard International Law Journal 319–78.Google Scholar
Lang, Heinrich, ‘§ 27 Krankenbehandlung’, in Becker, Ulrich and Kingreen, Thorsten (eds.), SGB V – Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung (8th edn., C.H. Beck, 2022).Google Scholar
Lazar, Nomi Claire, States of Emergency in Liberal Democracies (Cambridge University Press, 2009).10.1017/CBO9780511596704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lecourt, Robert, ‘Le rôle du droit dans l’unification européenne’ (1964) 17–18 Bulletin de l’Association des juristes européens 5–23.Google Scholar
Legrand, Pierre, ‘The Impossibility of “Legal Transplants”’ (1997) 4 Maastricht Journal of European & Comparative Law 111–24.10.1177/1023263X9700400202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leijten, Ingrid, ‘Human rights v. Insufficient climate action: The Urgenda case’ (2019) 37:2 Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 112–8.10.1177/0924051919844375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenaerts, Koen, ‘La vie après l’avis: Exploring the Principle of Mutual (Yet Not Blind) Trust’ (2017) 54:3 Common Market Law Review 805–40.10.54648/COLA2017061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepsius, Oliver, ‘Die maßstabsetzende Gewalt’, in Jestaedt, Matthias et al. (eds.), Das entgrenzte Gericht (3rd edn., Suhrkamp, 2019), pp. 159–281.Google Scholar
Levi-Faur, David, ‘From “Big Government” to “Big Governance”?’, in id. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 3–18.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560530.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Sanford and Balkin, Jack M., Democracy and Dysfunction (University of Chicago Press, 2019).10.7208/chicago/9780226612188.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David E., The Politics of Presidential Appointments: Political Control and Bureaucratic Performance (Princeton University Press, 2008).10.1515/9781400837687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David E., ‘Revisiting the Administrative Presidency: Policy, Patronage, and Agency Competence’ (2009) 39:1 Presidential Studies Quarterly 60–73.10.1111/j.1741-5705.2008.03658.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebenberg, Sandra ‘Engaging the Paradoxes of the Universal and Particular in Human Rights Adjudication: The Possibilities and Pitfalls of “Meaningful Engagement”’ (2012) 12 African Human Rights Law Journal 1–29.Google Scholar
Liebenberg, Sandra, ‘The Art of the (Im)Possible? Justice Froneman’s Contribution to Designing Remedies for Structural Human Rights Violations’ (2022) 12:1 Constitutional Court Review 137–70.10.2989/CCR.2022.0006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebenberg, Sandra and Young, Katherine G., ‘Adjudicating Social Rights: Can Democratic Experimentalism Help?’, in García, Helena Alviar, Klare, Karl and Williams, Lucy A. (eds.), Socio-Economic Rights in Theory and Practice: Critical Inquiries (Routledge, 2015), pp. 237–57.Google Scholar
Locke, John, Two Treatises of Government (Cambridge University Press, 2013, Peter Laslett edition).Google Scholar
Loevy, Karin, Emergencies in Public Law: The Legal Politics of Containment (Cambridge University Press, 2016).10.1017/CBO9781316403556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lübbe, Anna, ‘“Systemic Flaws” and Dublin Transfers: Incompatible Tests Before the CJEU and the ECtHR?’ (2015) 27:1 International Journal of Refugee Law 135–40.10.1093/ijrl/eev004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lustig, Doreen and Weiler, Joseph H. H., ‘Judicial Review in the Contemporary World: Retrospective and Prospective’ (2018) 16:2 International Journal of Constitutional Law 315–72.10.1093/icon/moy057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madlingozi, Tshepo, ‘Social Justice in a Time of Neo-Apartheid Constitutionalism: Critiquing the Anti-Black Economy of Recognition, Incorporation and Distribution’ (2017) 28:1 Stellenbosch Law Review 123–47.Google Scholar
Mahomed, Faraaz, ‘The Fourth Branch: Challenges and Opportunities for a Robust and Meaningful Role for South Africa’s State Institutions Supporting Democracy’, in Bilchitz, David and Landau, David (eds.), The Evolution of the Separation of Powers: Between the Global North and the Global South (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018), pp. 177–205.Google Scholar
Marciano, Alain and Medema, Stephen G., ‘Market Failure in Context: Introduction’ (2015) 47 History of Political Economy 1–19.10.1215/00182702-3130415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Stephen, ‘The Post Office Horizon Scandal: A Brief Chronology’ (2021) 18 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review 1–9.Google Scholar
Mate, Manoj, ‘The Rise of Judicial Governance in the Supreme Court of India’ (2015) 33 Boston University International Law Journal 169–224.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Lucy, Mead, Sarah and van Berkel, Dennis, ‘Standards for Adjudicating the Next Generation of Urgenda-Style Climate Cases’ (2022) 13:1 Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 35–63.10.4337/jhre.2022.0003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, Benoit, ‘The Contribution of Urgenda to the Mitigation of Climate Change’ (2022) XX Journal of Environmental Law 1–18.Google Scholar
McCarthy-Cotter, Leanne-Marie and Flinders, Matthew V., ‘Accountability in Liberal Democratic, Parliamentary Systems’, in Ongaro, Edoardo and Van Thiel, Sandra (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe (Palgrave Macmillan, 2017).Google Scholar
Medina-Quiroga, Cecilia, The Battle of Human Rights: Gross, Systematic Violations and the Inter-American System (Springer Netherlands, 1988).10.1163/9789004478497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinel, Florian, ‘Confidence and Control in Parliamentary Government: Parliamentary Questioning, Executive Knowledge, and the Transformation of Democratic Accountability’ (2018) 66:2 The American Journal of Comparative Law 317–67.10.1093/ajcl/avy028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melling, Graham and Dennett, Anne, ‘The Security Council Veto and Syria: Responding to Mass Atrocities through the “Uniting for Peace” Resolution’ (2017) 57 Indian Journal of International Law 285–307.10.1007/s40901-018-0084-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gergen, Mark P., Golden, John M. and Smith, Henry E., ‘The Supreme Court’s Accidental Revolution? The Test for Permanent Injunctions’ (2012) 112 Columbia Law Review 203–249.Google Scholar
Merrill, Thomas W., ‘Capture Theory and the Courts: 1967–1983’ (1997) 72:4 Chicago-Kent Law Review 1039–117.Google Scholar
Mhango, Mtendeweka, ‘Is It Time for a Coherent Political Question Doctrine in South Africa? Lessons from the United States’ (2014) 7:4 South African Journal of Legal Studies 457–93.Google Scholar
Miglionico, Andrea and Maiani, Francesco, “‘One Principle to Rule Them All? Anatomy of Mutual Trust in the Law of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice’” (2020) 57: 1 Common Market Law Review, 7–44.Google Scholar
Mishkin, Paul J., ‘Federal Courts as State Reformers’ (1978) 35:3 Washington and Lee Law Review 949–76.Google Scholar
Mjöll Arnardóttir, Oddný, ‘Res Interpretata, Erga Omnes Effect and the Role of the Margin of Appreciation in Giving Domestic Effect to the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2017) 28:3 European Journal of International Law 819–43.Google Scholar
Modiri, Joel M., ‘Conquest and Constitutionalism: First Thoughts on an Alternative Jurisprudence’ (2018) 34:3 South African Journal on Human Rights 300–25.10.1080/02587203.2018.1550939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moffitt, Benjamin, ‘How to Perform Crisis: A Model for Understanding the Key Role of Crisis in Contemporary Populism’ (2015) 50:2 Government and Opposition 189–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möller, Kai, ‘Justifying the Culture of Justification’ (2019) 17:4 International Journal of Constitutional Law 1078–97.10.1093/icon/moz086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möllers, Christoph, ‘Legalität, Legitimität und Legitimation’, in Jestaedt, Matthias et al. (eds.), Das entgrenzte Gericht (3rd edn., Suhrkamp, 2019), pp. 281–423.Google Scholar
Möllers, Christoph, The Three Branches: A Comparative Model of Separation of Powers (Oxford University Press, 2013).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199602117.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monnet, John C., ‘The Latest Phase of Negro Disfranchisement’ (2009) 62 Oklahoma Law Review 407.Google Scholar
Morsink, Johannes, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent, Pennsylvania Studies in Human Rights (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999).10.9783/9780812200416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Gaurav and Tuovinen, Juha, ‘Designing Remedies for a Recalcitrant Administration’ (2020) 36:4 South African Journal on Human Rights 386–409.10.1080/02587203.2021.1938660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Jan-Werner, What Is Populism? (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016).10.9783/9780812293784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muralidhar, S., ‘Public Interest Litigation’ (1997–1998) 33–34 Annual Survey of Indian Law.Google Scholar
Murphy, Peri U. and Pasquale, Pasquino, ‘Long Lasting State of Emergency in Turkey and the Recent Constitutional Amendments Under Its Shade’ (2023) 10:2 International Journal of Human Rights and Constitutional Studies 99–113.10.1504/IJHRCS.2023.129998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Donnette, ‘Flawed and Unnecessary: the “Unwilling or Unable” Doctrine Pertaining to States’ Use of Force in Self-Defence against Non-State Actors’ (2017) 30 Hague Yearbook of International Law 59–118.Google Scholar
Nahlawi, Yasmine, ‘Overcoming Russian and Chinese Vetoes on Syria Through Uniting for Peace’ (2019) 24:1 Journal of Conflict and Security Law 111–43.10.1093/jcsl/kry032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, Douglass, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge University Press, 1990).10.1017/CBO9780511808678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ockham, William of, Dialogus, available at http://publications.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/pubs/dialogus/t31d1new.html#zp16.Google Scholar
Odermatt, Jed, ‘Patterns of Avoidance: Political Questions Before International Courts’ (2018) 14:2 International Journal of Law in Context 221–36.10.1017/S1744552318000046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orford, Anne, International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect (Cambridge University Press, 2011).10.1017/CBO9780511973574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagden, Anthony, ‘The Genesis of “Governance” and Enlightenment Conceptions of the Cosmopolitan World Order’ (1998) 50:155 International Social Science Journal 7–15.10.1111/1468-2451.00105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Edward C., Policy Without Politicians: Bureaucratic Influence in Comparative Perspective (Oxford University Press, 2012).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199645138.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payandeh, Mehrdad, ‘Das Gebot der Folgerichtigkeit: Rationalitätsgewinn oder Irrweg der Grundrechtsdogmatik?’ (2011) 136:4 Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts 578–615.10.1628/000389111798369834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pergantis, Vassilis, ‘Recalibrating the “Strict Obligations” Requirement of the Bosphorus Doctrine of Equivalent Protection: The Strasbourg Court Vis-à-Vis the EU Principle of Mutual Trust’ (2024) 20:3 European Constitutional Law Review 392–423.10.1017/S157401962400018XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Niels, Proportionality and Judicial Activism: Fundamental Rights Adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa (Cambridge University Press, 2017).10.1017/9781316823330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, Niels, ‘Legislative Inconsistency and the “Smoking Out” of Illicit Motives’ (2016) 64:1 The American Journal of Comparative Law 121–45.10.5131/AJCL.2016.0004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pildes, Richard H., ‘Keeping Legal History Meaningful’ (2002) 19 Constitutional Commentary 645–61.Google Scholar
Pildes, Richard H., ‘Democracy, Anti-Democracy, and the Canon’ (2000) 17 Constitutional Commentary 295–319.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl, The Open Society and Its Enemies. Volume I: The Spell of Plato (Routledge 2010).Google Scholar
Pozen, David E., ‘Self-Help and the Separation of Powers’ (2014) 124:1 The Yale Law Journal 2–90.Google Scholar
Prado, Mariana Mota and Trebilcock, Michael J., Institutional Bypasses: A Strategy to Promote Reforms for Development (Cambridge University Press, 2019).Google Scholar
Prakash, Aseem and Potoski, Matthew, ‘Dysfunctional Institutions? Toward a New Agenda in Governance Studies’ (2016) 10:2 Regulation & Governance 115–25.10.1111/rego.12113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinot, Geo and Liebenberg, Sandra, ‘Narrowing the Band: Reasonableness Review in Administrative Justice and Socio-Economic Rights Jurisprudence in South Africa’ (2011) 22 Stellenbosch Law Review 639–63.Google Scholar
Ramsden, Michael, ‘Uniting for Peace and Humanitarian Intervention: The Authorising Function of the U.N. General Assembly’ (2016) 25:2 Washington International Law Journal 267–306.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, Morten, ‘Establishing a Constitutional Practice of European Law: The History of the Legal Service of the European Executive’ (2012) 21:3 Contemporary European History 375–397.10.1017/S0960777312000252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, Brian, Engaging with Social Rights: Procedure, Participation and Democracy in South Africa’s Second Wave (Cambridge University Press, 2016).10.1017/CBO9781139333702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicher, Harry, ‘The Uniting for Peace Resolution on the Thirtieth Anniversary of its Passage’ (1981) 20:1 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 1–49.Google Scholar
Resnik, Judith, ‘Managerial Judges’ (1982) 96:2 Harvard Law Review 374–448.10.2307/1340797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, Kent, Remedies for Human Rights Violations: A Two-Track Approach to Supra-national and National Law, Cambridge Studies on Constitutional Law, Vol. 27 (Cambridge University Press, 2021).10.1017/9781108283618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, Kent, ‘Polycentricity and Queue Jumping in Public Law Remedies: A Two-Track Response’ (2016) 66:1 University of Toronto Law Journal 3–52.10.3138/UTLJ.3244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, Kent and Budlender, Geoff, ‘Mandatory Relief and Supervisory Jurisdiction: When Is It Appropriate, Just and Equitable?’ (2005) 122:2 South African Law Journal 325–51.Google Scholar
Robinson, Nick, ‘Expanding Judiciaries: India and the Rise of the Good Governance Court’ (2009) 8 Washington University Global Studies Law Review 1–70.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Garavito, César and Rodríguez-Franco, Diana, Radical Deprivation on Trial (Cambridge University Press, 2015).10.1017/CBO9781139940849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Garavito, César, ‘Beyond the Courtroom: The Impact of Judicial Activism on Socioeconomic Rights in Latin America’ (2011) 89 Texas Law Review 1669-98.Google Scholar
Roger, Charles B., The Origins of Informality: Why the Legal Foundations of Global Governance Are Shifting, and Why It Matters (Oxford University Press, 2020).10.1093/oso/9780190947965.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rombouts, Heidy, Sardaro, Pietro and Vandeginste, Stef, ‘The Right to Reparation for Victims of Gross and Systematic Violations of Human Rights’, in de Feyter, Koen et al. (eds.), Out of the Ashes: Reparation for Victims of Gross and Systematic Human Rights Violations (Intersentia, 2005), pp. 345–503.Google Scholar
Romero Páez, Nicolás Augusto, ‘La doctrina del estado de cosas inconstitucional en Colombia: – Novedades del neonstitucionalismo y la “inconstitucionalidad de la Realidad”’ (2012) 1 Derecho Público Iberoamericano 243–63.Google Scholar
Rosanvallon, Pierre, Counter-Democracy: Politics in an Age of Distrust (Cambridge University Press, 2008).10.1017/CBO9780511755835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald N., The Hollow Hope (University of Chicago Press, 2008).10.7208/chicago/9780226726687.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roux, Theunis, ‘Grand Narratives of Transition and the Quest for Democratic Constitutionalism in India and South Africa’ (2024) 57 Verfassung in Recht und Übersee/World Comparative Law 5–71.10.5771/0506-7286-2024-1-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roux, Theunis, ‘The Global South and Liberal Constitutionalism: Incommensurable Opposites?’ on AUSPUBLAW, 7 July 2021.Google Scholar
Roux, Theunis, ‘In Defence of Empirical Entanglement: The Methodological Flaw in Waldron’s Case Against Judicial Review’ (2015) 73 UNSW Law Research Paper, available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2712058.Google Scholar
Roux, Theunis, The Politics of Principle: The First South African Constitutional Court, 1995–2005 (Cambridge University Press, 2013).10.1017/CBO9781139005081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roux, Theunis, ‘Transformative Constitutionalism and the Best Interpretation of the South African Constitution: Distinction Without a Difference?’ (2009) 20:2 Stellenbosch Law Review 258–85.Google Scholar
Russell, Meg, ‘Brexit and Parliament: The Anatomy of a Perfect Storm’ (2021) 74:2 Parliamentary Affairs 443–463.10.1093/pa/gsaa011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabel, Charles F. and Zeitlin, Jonathan, ‘Learning from Difference: The New Architecture of Experimentalist Governance in the European Union’ (2008) 14:3 European Law Journal 271–327.10.1111/j.1468-0386.2008.00415.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabel, Charles F. and Simon, William H., ‘Destabilization Rights: How Public Law Litigation Succeeds’ (2004) 117 Harvard Law Review 1016–101.10.2307/4093364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sadl, Urska, ‘The Role of Effet Utile in Preserving the Continuity and Authority of European Union Law: Evidence from the Citation Web of the Pre-accession Case Law of the Court of Justice of the EU’ (2015) 8:1 European Journal of Legal Studies 18–45.Google Scholar
Sadurski, Wojciech, ‘“Solange, Chapter 3”: Constitutional Courts in Central Europe – Democracy – European Union’ (2008) 14:1 European Law Journal 1–35.10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00400.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagar, Rahul, ‘Chapter 13: Emergency Powers’, in Choudhry, Sujit, Khosla, Madhav and Mehta, Pratap Bhanu (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution (Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 213–31.Google Scholar
Sandler, Ross and Schoenbrod, David, Democracy by Decree: What Happens When Courts Run Government (Yale University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Sangiovanni, Andrea, ‘Solidarity in the European Union’ (2013) 33:2 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 213–41.10.1093/ojls/gqs033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sathe, Satyaranjan Purushottam, Judicial Activism in India: Transgressing Borders and Enforcing Limits (2nd edn., Oxford University Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Scharpf, Fritz W., Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford University Press, 1999).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198295457.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheuerman, William E., ‘Survey Article: Emergency Powers and the Rule of Law After 9/11’ (2006) 14:1 Journal of Political Philosophy 61–84.10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00256.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Carl, Politische Theologie: Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität (Duncker & Humblot, 1922).Google Scholar
Schneider, Linda, Responses by the CJEU to the European Crisis of Democracy and the Rule of Law (Forum Transregionale Studien, 2020).Google Scholar
Scicluna, Nicole, ‘Integration through the Disintegration of Law? The ECB and EU Constitutionalism in the Crisis’ (2018) 25:12 Journal of European Public Policy 1874–91.10.1080/13501763.2017.1362026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Setzer, Joana and Vanhala, Lisa C., ‘Climate Change Litigation: A Review of Research on Courts and Litigants in Climate Governance’ (2019) 10:3 Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 580.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Scott J., ‘Law, Plans, and Practical Reason’ (2002) 8:4 Legal Theory 387–441.10.1017/S135232520208401XhCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharman, Campbell, ‘Parliamentary Federations and Limited Government: Constitutional Design and Redesign in Australia and Canada’ (1990) 2:2 Journal of Theoretical Politics 205–30.10.1177/0951692890002002004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirvani, Foroud, ‘Die Bundes – und Reichsexekution in der neueren Deutschen Verfassungsgeschichte’ (2011) 50:1 Der Staat 102–21.10.3790/staa.50.1.102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibanda, Sanele, ‘When Do You Call Time on Compromise? South Africa’s Discourse on Transformation and the Future of Transformative Constitutionalism’ (2020) 24 Law Democracy and Development 384–412.10.17159/2077-4907/2020/ldd.v24.16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sibanda, Sanele, ‘Not Purpose-Made! Transformative Constitutionalism, Post-Independence Constitutionalism and the Struggle to Eradicate Poverty’ (2011) 22:3 Stellenbosch Law Review 482–500.Google Scholar
Simon, William H., ‘Toyota Jurisprudence, : Legal Theory and Rolling Rule Regimes’, in de Búrca, Gráinne and Scott, Joane (eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU and the US (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2006), pp. 37–64.Google Scholar
Sinclair, Guy Fiti, To Reform the World (Oxford University Press, 2017).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198757962.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skubiszewski, Krzysztof, ‘Implied Powers of International Organizations’, in Dinstein, Yoram and Tabory, Mala (eds.), International Law at a Time of Perplexity: Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1989), pp. 855–69.Google Scholar
Somek, Alexander, The Cosmopolitan Constitution (Oxford University Press, 2014).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199651535.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somek, Alexander, ‘Administration Without Sovereignty’, in Dobner, Petra and Loughlin, Martin (eds.), The Twilight of Constitutionalism? (Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 267–88.Google Scholar
Starski, Paulina, The ‘Unwilling or Unable’ State as a Challenge to International Law, Habilitation thesis, Bucerius Law School (2020).Google Scholar
Sternberg, Claudia S., ‘Political Legitimacy Between Democracy and Effectiveness: Trade-offs, Interdependencies, and Discursive Constructions by the EU Institutions’ (2015) 7:4 European Political Science Review 615–38.10.1017/S1755773914000356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, Peter L., ‘Formal and Functional Approaches to Separation of Powers Questions: A Foolish Inconsistency’ (1987) 72:3 Cornell Law Review 488–526.Google Scholar
Sundstøl Eriksen, Stein, ‘“State Failure” in Theory and Practice: The Idea of the State and the Contradictions of State Formation’ (2011) 37:1 Review of International Studies 229–47.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., ‘Nonsectarian Welfare Statements’ (2016) 10:2 Regulation & Governance, 126–33.10.1111/rego.12102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., ‘What’s Standing After Lujan? Of Citizen Suits, “Injuries,” and Article III’ (1992) 91:2 Michigan Law Review 163–236.10.2307/1289685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Susi, Mart, ‘The Definition of a Structural Problem in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights Since 2010’ (2012) 55 German Yearbook of International Law 385–419.Google Scholar
Sweet, Alec Stone, ‘A Cosmopolitian Legal Order: Constitutional Pluralism and Rights Adjudication in Europe’ (2012) 1:1 Global Constitutionalism 53–90.10.1017/S2045381711000062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szele, Bálint, ‘“Crises are Opportunities” Jean Monnet and the First Steps Towards Europe’ (2003) 2:2 European Integration Studies 5–15.Google Scholar
Tardu, Maxime E., ‘United Nations Response to Gross Violations of Human Rights: The 1503 Procedure’ (1980) 20:3 Santa Clara Law Review 559.Google Scholar
Taylor, Helen, ‘Forcing the Court’s Remedial Hand: Non-compliance as a Catalyst for Remedial Innovation’ (2019) 9:1 Constitutional Court Review 247–81.10.2989/CCR.2019.0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, Günther, Constitutional Fragments: Societal Constitutionalism and Globalization (Oxford University Press, 2012).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644674.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teubner, Günther, ‘Constitutionalising Polycontexturality’ (2011) 20 Social and Legal Studies 210–29.10.1177/0964663911400245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theuns, Tom, ‘The Need for an EU Expulsion Mechanism: Democratic Backsliding and the Failure of Article 7’ (2022) 28 Res Publica 693–713.10.1007/s11158-021-09537-wCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thiruvengadam, Arun K., ‘Swallowing a Bitter PIL? Reflections on Progressive Strategies for Public Interest Litigation in India’, in Vilhena, Oscar et al. (eds.), Transformative Constitutionalism: Comparing the Apex Courts in Brazil, India and South Africa (Pretoria University Press, 2013), pp. 519–31.Google Scholar
Thornhill, Chris and de Araújo Calabria, Carina Rodriguez, ‘Global Constitutionalism and Democracy: The Case of Colombia’ (2020) 2 Jus Cogens 155–83.10.1007/s42439-020-00024-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thürer, Daniel, ‘The “Failed State” and International Law’ (1999) 81:836 International Review of the Red Cross 731–761.10.1017/S1560775500103694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmer, Alexandra, ‘A Quiet Revolution: Vulnerability in the European Court of Human Rights’, in Fineman, Martha Albertson and Grear, Anna (eds.), Vulnerability (Routledge, 2016), pp. 147–70.Google Scholar
Tokatlı, Mahir, ‘Impeachment as Last Resort to Safeguard Democracy? Removing the Head of Government in Different Institutional Settings’ (2024) 65:2 Politische Vierteljahresschrift 395–415.10.1007/s11615-023-00488-wCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolley, Howard Jr., ‘The Concealed Crack in the Citadel: The United Nations Commission on Human Rights Response to Confidential Communications’ (1984) 6:4 Human Rights Quarterly 420–62.10.2307/762183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomuschat, Christian, ‘“Uniting for Peace”: ein Rückblick nach 50 Jahren’ (2001) 76:2/3 Die Friedens-Warte 289–303.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George, ‘Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism’ (1995) 25:3 British Journal of Political Science 289–325.10.1017/S0007123400007225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark, The New Fourth Branch: Institutions for Protecting Constitutional Democracy (Cambridge University Press, 2021).10.1017/9781009047609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark, Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law (Princeton University Press, 2009).10.1515/9781400828159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tushnet, Mark, ‘Law and Prudence in the Law of Justiciability: The Transformation and Disappearance of the Political Question Doctrine’ (2002) 80 North Carolina Law Review 1203–35.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark, ‘Policy Distortion and Democratic Debilitation: Comparative Illumination of the Countermajoritarian Difficulty’ (1995) 94:2 Michigan Law Review 247-301.10.2307/1289839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tzouvala, Ntina, Capitalism as Civilisation: A History of International Law, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, Vol. 142 (Cambridge University Press, 2020).10.1017/9781108684415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tzouvala, Ntina, ‘TWAIL and the “Unwilling or Unable” Doctrine: Continuities and Ruptures’ (2015) 109 American Journal of International Law 266–70.Google Scholar
Uitz, Renáta, ‘EU Rule of Law Dialogues: Risks – in Context’, Verfassungsblog, 23 January 2020, https://verfassungsblog.de/eu-rule-of-law-dialogues-risks-in-context/.Google Scholar
Unger, Roberto Mangabeira, False Necessity: Anti-necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy (Cambridge University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
Van der Schyff, Gerhard, ‘The Prohibition on Constitutional Review by the Judiciary in the Netherlands in Critical Perspective: The Case and Roadmap for Reform’ (2020) 21:5 German Law Journal 884–903.10.1017/glj.2020.45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vauchez, Antoine, ‘Integration Through Law: Contribution to a Socio-History of EU Political Commonsense’ (2008) 10 EUI Working Papers (European University Institute).Google Scholar
Venzke, Ingo and Mendes, Joana, ‘The Idea of Relative Authority in European and International Law’ (2018) 16:1 International Journal of Constitutional Law 75–100.10.1093/icon/moy005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vilbert, Frank, The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers (Cambridge University Press, 2009).Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy, ‘The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review’, (2006) 115:6 The Yale Law Journal 1346–405.10.2307/20455656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wegener, Bernhard, ‘Urgenda – Weltrettung per Gerichtsbeschluss’ (2019) Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht 3–13.Google Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H., ‘In the Face of Crisis: Input Legitimacy, Output Legitimacy and the Political Messianism of European Integration’ (2012) 34:7 Journal of European Integration 825–41.10.1080/07036337.2012.726017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiler, Joseph H. H., ‘The Transformation of Europe’ (1991) 100:8 The Yale Law Journal 2403–83.10.2307/796898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wewerinke‐Singh, Margaretha and McCoach, Ashleigh, ‘The State of the Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation: Distilling Best Practice and Lessons Learnt for Future Rights‐Based Climate Litigation’ (2021) 30:2 Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law 275–83.Google Scholar
White, Jonathan, ‘The De-institutionalisation of Power Beyond the State’ (2022) 28:1 European Journal of International Relations 187–208.10.1177/13540661211053683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Jonathan, Politics of Last Resort: Governing by Emergency in the European Union (Oxford University Press, 2019).10.1093/oso/9780198791720.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Michael D. et al., ‘Federal Civil Litigation as an Instrument of Police Reform: A Natural Experiment Exploring the Effects of the Floyd Ruling on Stop-and-Frisk Activities in New York City’ (2016) 14 Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 9–66.Google Scholar
White, Nigel David, ‘The United Nations System: Conference, Contract or Constitutional Order’ (2000) 4 Singapore Journal of International & Comparative Law 281–99.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith E., ‘Impeachment in a System of Checks and Balances’ (2022) 87:3 Missouri Law Review 835–61.Google Scholar
Whittington, Keith E., Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History (Princeton University Press, 2007).10.1515/9781400827756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wildhaber, Luzius, ‘Pilot Judgments in Cases of Structural or Systemic Problems on the National Level’, in Deutsch, Ulrike and Wolfrum, Rüdiger (eds.), The European Court of Human Rights Overwhelmed by Applications: Problems and Possible Solutions (Springer, 2009), pp. 69–75.10.1007/978-3-540-93960-3_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, Michael A., Authoritarian Liberalism and the Transformation of Modern Europe (Oxford University Press, 2021).10.1093/oso/9780198854753.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wischmeyer, Thomas, Zwecke im Recht des Verfassungsstaates: Geschichte und Theorie einer juristischen Denkfigur (Mohr Siebeck, 2015).Google Scholar
Wischmeyer, , ‘Generating Trust Through Law? Judicial Cooperation in the European Union and the “Principle of Mutual Trust”’ 17:3 (2016) German Law Journal 339–82.10.1017/S2071832200019805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamin, Alicia Ely, Parra-Vera, Oscar and Gianella, Camila, ‘Colombia: Judicial Protection of the Right to Health: An Elusive Promise?’, in Yamin, Alicia Ely and Gloppen, Siri (eds.), Litigating Health Rights: Can Courts Bring More Justice to Health? (Harvard University Press, 2011), pp. 103–31.10.2307/j.ctvjz81hcCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yap, Po Jen, ‘Remedial Discretion and Dilemmas in Asia’ (2019) 69: 1 University of Toronto Law Journal 84–104.10.3138/utlj.69.s1.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yap, Po Jen, Constitutional Remedies in Asia (Routledge, 2019).10.4324/9780429435485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Katharine, ‘The Canons of Social and Economic Rights’ (2021) 553:1 Boston College Law School Legal Studies Research Paper 1–18.Google Scholar
Zittoun, Philippe, ‘Analysing Policy Failure as an Argumentative Strategy in the Policymaking Process: A Pragmatist Perspective’ (2015) 30:3 Public Policy and Administration 243–60.10.1177/0952076715581634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this book
complies with version 2.2 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range
of users and attains the highest
(AAA)
level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive
accessibility guidelines.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You have
Access
Open access