John, I will not presume to comment about members of the bench and
their views on constitutional law.
Not exact matches
Such a
view of
law would permit for - profit corporations to have the moral culpability of criminal convictions, take moral
views on a slew of ethical concerns, and let corporations exercise other
constitutional guarantees as persons while inexplicably siphoning off only for - profit corporations from religious protection.
Scalia believed his job in education cases was to read and apply the text of the
law, and not allow his personal
views on education to come in through the backdoor via free - ranging interpretations of vague statutory and
constitutional provisions.
In my
view, this saga illustrates a positive side to the «conditional» acceptance of EU
law primacy by national
constitutional courts as the latter provide checks and balances
on the ECJ's enormous judicial power.
This could be argued to endorse the
view expressed by the author
on this blog in November that the «
constitutional requirements» clause in Article 50 (1) functions as the bridge between the domestic legal order and the Union legal order, and thus the giving and potential revocation of notice under Article 50 (2) is purely a matter of domestic
law.
And, I suppose there's some reason to consider there's some basis for believing the fact that the Ontario Court of Appeal and the British Columbia Court of Appeal seem to have different
views on the
law regarding causation could be some basis for believing there's something about the
law regarding causation that's a wee bit controversial (even accepting that the division of powers structure in the Constitution Act means that that conflict IS
constitutional).
The Italian
constitutional Court has upheld national rules which had been judged by the ECHR as contrary to the Convention, arguing that such rules nevertheless protected a different
constitutional principle of the national constitution and the convention could not modify the constitution, beng it a lower rank act - so from a theoretical point of
view the CJEU adopts the same approach: the ultimate decision
on whether a EU act is in compliance with EU
law must be taken within EU only (to make a parallel, think of the CJEU approach for WTO decisions: despite an action being contrary to WTO as decided by the appellate body, nonetheless individuals can use such illegality as a ground to void the action within the EU system)
«
Constitutional democracy means that institutions have different jobs to do and Parliament has its job to do, which is a very important job — to put before Parliament and vote
on laws in accordance with the
views of the government of the day and their representatives.