<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
  <record>
    <leader>00000nam  2200000   4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">INLIS000000000003618</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20221109112814</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="035" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">0010-0520003618</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <controlfield tag="008">221109################|##########|#eng##</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="020" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">9780691130927</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">eng</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="082" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">347.73</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">347.73 TUS w</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Tushnet, Mark</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Weak Courts, Strong Rights :</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">Judicial Review And Social Welfare Rights In Comparative Constitutional Law /</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Mark Tushnet</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="260" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Princeton :</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">Princeton University Press,</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">2008</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="300" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">xvi, 272 hlm.; 23 cm ;</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">23 cm</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="500" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Indeks : p. 269-272</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights, Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law. Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="a">Judicial review</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="a">Social rights</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="990" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">12771/MKRI-P/VIII-2009</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="990" ind1="#" ind2="#">
      <subfield code="a">12771/MKRI-P/VIII-2009</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>
