Raban, OferKuçuradi, İoanna2024-07-122024-07-122011Raban, O. (2011). A rachet that can get stuck: on the relationship between the federal and the states' constitutions. Hukuk Felsefesini Yeniden Düşünmek: Hukuk Teorileri, İnsan Hakları ve Anayasalar. (s. 23-35). İstanbul: Maltepe Üniversitesi.978-975-6760-41-3https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12415/4996In the l980s, when the British were deliberating the adoption of a Bill of Rights coupled with the powers of judicial review, Some opposed such judicial powers on the ground that British judges were so conservative and "establishment minded" that their interpretation would result in too cramped a regimc of civil liberties.I But there was something odd about an argument against judicial review that was based on fear of contracted liberties: however cramped a view of a Bill of Rights judges may have, the British Parliament could always go beyond the rights elaborated by judges and offer greater protections.r After all, civil rights provisions constitute the floor for civil liberties, not the ceiling; they mark mini mal guarantees, but do not preclude more expansive ones. Thus, grantingjudges the authoritative say about what the Bill of Rights require (rather than leaving such determinations to the legislature) could only expand civil liberties beyond Parliament's vision, but not contract them. Judicial review even by conseryative and establishınent-minded judges almost always results in more civil rights. I say almostbecause, as we shall see below, there are some interesting exceptions to this general principle.enAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United Statesinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFederal constitutionsStates constitutionsCivil rightsFederal governmentThe federal Bill of RightsAmerican constitutionalBook3523