Proportionality and the Rule of Law : Rights, Justification, Reasoning /

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Imprint:New York : Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Description:1 online resource (ix, 421 pages)
Language:English
Subject:
Format: E-Resource Book
URL for this record:http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/12015077
Hidden Bibliographic Details
Other authors / contributors:Huscroft, Grant, editor.
Miller, Bradley W. (Bradley Wayne), 1968- editor.
Webber, Grégoire C. N. (Grégoire Charles N.), editor.
ISBN:9781139958202
1139958208
9781107565272
1107565278
9781139960311
1139960318
1139950746
9781139950749
9781139959254
1139959255
9781107064072
1107064074
9781107647954
1107647959
Notes:Includes bibliographical references and index.
Print version record.
Summary:"To speak of human rights is to speak of proportionality. It is no exaggeration to claim that proportionality has overtaken rights as the orienting idea in contemporary human rights law and scholarship. Proportionality has been received into the constitutional doctrine of courts in continental Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Israel, and South Africa, as well as the jurisprudence of treaty-based legal systems like the European Court of Human Rights, giving rise to claims of a global model, a received approach, or, simply, the best-practice standard of rights adjudication. Even in the United States, which is widely understood to have formally rejected proportionality, some argue that the various levels of scrutiny adopted by the US Supreme Court are analogous to the standard questions posed by proportionality. As proportionality scholars are well aware, some of the early literature on balancing and rights is American, with special reference to the First Amendment. Notwithstanding proportionality's popularity, there is no consensus on its methodology. Much less does the use of a proportionality doctrine guarantee consensus on substantive rights questions. What the principle of proportionality promises is a common analytical framework, a framework the significance of which is not in its ubiquity (a mere fact), but because its structure influences (some would say controls) how courts reason to conclusions in many of the great moral and political questions confronting political communities. As a framework, proportionality analysis is superficially straightforward, setting out four questions in evaluating whether the limitation of a right is justifiable. A serviceable - but by no means canonical"--
Other form:Print version: Proportionality and the rule of law 9781107064072

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a2200000Ki 4500
001 12015077
005 20210426223010.9
006 m o d
007 cr cnu---unuuu
008 140505s2014 nyu ob 001 0 eng d
019 |a 957614575  |a 960715892 
020 |a 9781139958202  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 1139958208  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 9781107565272  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 1107565278  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 9781139960311 
020 |a 1139960318 
020 |a 1139950746  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 9781139950749  |q (electronic bk.) 
020 |a 9781139959254 
020 |a 1139959255 
020 |z 9781107064072 
020 |z 1107064074 
020 |z 9781107647954 
020 |z 1107647959 
035 |a (OCoLC)879202707  |z (OCoLC)957614575  |z (OCoLC)960715892 
035 9 |a (OCLCCM-CC)879202707 
040 |a N$T  |b eng  |e rda  |e pn  |c N$T  |d EBLCP  |d YDXCP  |d E7B  |d CAMBR  |d OCLCF  |d OCLCQ  |d OCLCO  |d QGK  |d OCLCQ  |d DEBSZ  |d OCLCQ  |d YDX  |d Z5A  |d BUF  |d UEJ  |d UAB  |d OCLCQ  |d OCLCO  |d OCLCQ  |d FIE  |d AU@  |d UKAHL  |d OCLCQ  |d K6U  |d OCLCA 
049 |a MAIN 
050 4 |a XXK247  |b .P79 2014eb 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 101000  |2 bisacsh 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 044000  |2 bisacsh 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 052000  |2 bisacsh 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 071000  |2 bisacsh 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 098000  |2 bisacsh 
072 7 |a LAW  |x 079000  |2 bisacsh 
084 |a LAW052000  |2 bisacsh 
245 0 0 |a Proportionality and the Rule of Law :  |b Rights, Justification, Reasoning /  |c edited by Grant Huscroft, Western University, Canada ; Bradley W. Miller, Western University, Canada ; Grégoire Webber, London School of Economics. 
264 1 |a New York :  |b Cambridge University Press,  |c 2014. 
300 |a 1 online resource (ix, 421 pages) 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a "To speak of human rights is to speak of proportionality. It is no exaggeration to claim that proportionality has overtaken rights as the orienting idea in contemporary human rights law and scholarship. Proportionality has been received into the constitutional doctrine of courts in continental Europe, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Israel, and South Africa, as well as the jurisprudence of treaty-based legal systems like the European Court of Human Rights, giving rise to claims of a global model, a received approach, or, simply, the best-practice standard of rights adjudication. Even in the United States, which is widely understood to have formally rejected proportionality, some argue that the various levels of scrutiny adopted by the US Supreme Court are analogous to the standard questions posed by proportionality. As proportionality scholars are well aware, some of the early literature on balancing and rights is American, with special reference to the First Amendment. Notwithstanding proportionality's popularity, there is no consensus on its methodology. Much less does the use of a proportionality doctrine guarantee consensus on substantive rights questions. What the principle of proportionality promises is a common analytical framework, a framework the significance of which is not in its ubiquity (a mere fact), but because its structure influences (some would say controls) how courts reason to conclusions in many of the great moral and political questions confronting political communities. As a framework, proportionality analysis is superficially straightforward, setting out four questions in evaluating whether the limitation of a right is justifiable. A serviceable - but by no means canonical"--  |c Provided by publisher. 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references and index. 
588 0 |a Print version record. 
505 0 |a Introduction / Grant Huscroft, Bradley W. Miller and Grégoire Webber -- The lost meaning of proportionality / Martin Luterán -- Proportionality is dead : long live proportionality! / Alison L. Young -- Human dignity and proportionality : deontic pluralism in balancing / Mattias Kumm and Alec D. Walen -- Between reason and strategy : some reflections on the normativity of proportionality / George Pavlakos -- On the loss of rights / Grégoire Webber -- Proportionality and rights inflation / Kai Möller -- Proportionality and the question of weight / Frederick Schauer -- Proportionality and the relevance of interpretation / Grant Huscroft -- Democracy, legality and proportionality / T.R.S. Allan -- Proportionality and deference in a culture of justification / David Dyzenhaus -- Proportionality and democratic constitutionalism / Stephen Gardbaum -- The rationalism of proportionality's culture of justification / Mark Antaki -- Proportionality and incommensurability / Timothy Endicott -- Legislating proportionately / Richard Ekins -- Proportionality's blind spot : 'neutrality' and political philosophy / Bradley W. Miller -- Mapping the American debate over balancing / Iddo Porat. 
650 0 |a Proportionality in law.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh96010689 
650 0 |a Human rights.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85026379 
650 0 |a Rule of law.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85115805 
650 7 |a LAW  |x Jurisprudence.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a LAW  |x Essays.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a LAW  |x General Practice.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a LAW  |x Paralegals & Paralegalism.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a LAW  |x Practical Guides.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a LAW  |x Reference.  |2 bisacsh 
650 7 |a Human rights.  |2 fast  |0 (OCoLC)fst00963285 
650 7 |a Proportionality in law.  |2 fast  |0 (OCoLC)fst01079251 
650 7 |a Rule of law.  |2 fast  |0 (OCoLC)fst01101218 
650 7 |a Menschenrecht  |2 gnd 
650 7 |a Rechtsstaatsprinzip  |2 gnd 
650 7 |a Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz  |2 gnd  |0 http://d-nb.info/gnd/4191765-0 
655 0 |a Electronic books. 
655 4 |a Electronic books. 
700 1 |a Huscroft, Grant,  |e editor.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n98103263 
700 1 |a Miller, Bradley W.  |q (Bradley Wayne),  |d 1968-  |e editor.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/nr2004035259 
700 1 |a Webber, Grégoire C. N.  |q (Grégoire Charles N.),  |e editor.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2009035049 
776 0 8 |i Print version:  |t Proportionality and the rule of law  |z 9781107064072  |w (DLC) 2013044707  |w (OCoLC)862401019 
903 |a HeVa 
929 |a oclccm 
999 f f |i 4fe9c3e0-90f2-56a6-a2e8-b5596a9408a5  |s 9180ba7c-e591-5f3f-aaa7-50e93413acde 
928 |t Library of Congress classification  |a XXK247 .P79 2014eb  |l Online  |c UC-FullText  |u https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=e000xna&AN=761504  |z eBooks on EBSCOhost  |g ebooks  |i 12409082