The tradition of constitutional adjudication

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

This chapter explores the tradition of constitutional adjudicationits methods and resultsin the context of the Fourth Amendment's barrier against unreasonable searches and seizures. The constitutional adjudicative tradition is not a magic elixir that will cure all the diseases of any society attempting to consolidate a democracy. It may be that such a tradition is not wholly sufficient to protect these rights even in a developed democracy. The changes and interpretations of the amendments, if they are to retain the precious feel of legitimacy so vital to the constitutional adjudicative process, must always remain subject to that tradition. The conception of law as a tradition, and constitutional adjudication as the art of rights theory, demands that we adhere closely to the ways to the Fourth Amendment Tradition. Constitutional protection exists precisely for what is too precious and fragile to be left to politics. The tradition of constitutional adjudication is indeed a worthy commitment for any nation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationTransition to Democracy in Latin America
Subtitle of host publicationThe Role of the Judiciary
PublisherTaylor and Francis
Pages347-365
Number of pages19
ISBN (Electronic)9781000003048
ISBN (Print)0813384567, 9780367212087
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The tradition of constitutional adjudication'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Stotzky, I. P. (2019). The tradition of constitutional adjudication. In Transition to Democracy in Latin America: The Role of the Judiciary (pp. 347-365). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429269578-23