메뉴 건너뛰기




Volumn 32, Issue 3, 1999, Pages

The counter-majoritarian difficulty in focus: Judicial review of initiatives

(1)  Pak, Mihui a  

a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords


EID: 0043139077     PISSN: 00101923     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review
Times cited : (6)

References (5)
  • 2
    • 0042827201 scopus 로고
    • Id. at 1. Id. at 3
    • See Alexander M. Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch 7 (1962). The power of judicial review distinguishes the Supreme Court from other government branches. Id. at 1. According to Chief Justice John Marshall: "To leave the decision with the legislature . . . is to allow those whose power is supposed to be limited themselves to set the limits -an absurd invitation to consistent abuse." Id. at 3.
    • (1962) The Least Dangerous Branch , vol.7
    • Bickel, A.M.1
  • 3
    • 0042827199 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • id. at 16-17
    • See id. at 16-17 (stating that "[w]hen the Supreme Court declares unconstitutional a legislative act or the action of an elected executive, it thwarts the will of representatives of the actual people of the here and now; it exercises control, not in behalf of the prevailing majority, but against it.").
  • 4
    • 0042827200 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Choper, supra note 1, at 5
    • Choper, supra note 1, at 5.
  • 5
    • 0041324547 scopus 로고
    • Let the voters decide? An assessment of the initiative and referendum process
    • See David B. Magleby, Let the Voters Decide? An Assessment of the Initiative and Referendum Process, 66 U. Colo. L. Rev. 13 (1995). Magleby differentiates between direct initiatives that go straight to the ballot and indirect initiatives that go on the legislature's agenda. Another form of direct democracy is the referendum which first passes
    • (1995) U. Colo. L. Rev. , vol.66 , pp. 13
    • Magleby, D.B.1


* 이 정보는 Elsevier사의 SCOPUS DB에서 KISTI가 분석하여 추출한 것입니다.