Introduction

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingForeword / PostscriptOtherpeer-review

Abstract

Much of the controversy surrounding constitutional interpretation concerns two issues. The first is a version of a conundrum that has perplexed lawyers for millennia: should the interpretation of a law he governed mainly by its 'letter', or by its 'spirit'? The second issue is the extent to which the meaning of a constitution can, and should, be determined by the original intentions, purposes, or understandings of its founders. This issue pits so-called 'nonoriginalists' against 'originalists'. This book explores the constitutions of six countries - Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, and the United States - and how they have been interpreted by their highest courts. It examines whether the courts' interpretive practices have changed over time, the apparent reasons for any changes, and whether the courts apply the same interpretive principles to different areas of constitutional law, such as federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. The book then reflects on the institutional, political, social, and cultural contexts that might help to explain differences between the practices of these courts.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationInterpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study
PublisherOxford University Press, USA
ISBN (Electronic)9780191706707
ISBN (Print)9780199226474
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2010

Keywords

  • Australia
  • Canada
  • Constitutional interpretation
  • Constitutions
  • Courts
  • Federalism
  • Germany
  • India
  • South Africa
  • United States

Cite this

Goldsworthy, J. (2010). Introduction. In Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study Oxford University Press, USA. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001
Goldsworthy, Jeffrey. / Introduction. Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study. Oxford University Press, USA, 2010.
@inbook{c6ba17575fba49aa9ce4d05adf8506eb,
title = "Introduction",
abstract = "Much of the controversy surrounding constitutional interpretation concerns two issues. The first is a version of a conundrum that has perplexed lawyers for millennia: should the interpretation of a law he governed mainly by its 'letter', or by its 'spirit'? The second issue is the extent to which the meaning of a constitution can, and should, be determined by the original intentions, purposes, or understandings of its founders. This issue pits so-called 'nonoriginalists' against 'originalists'. This book explores the constitutions of six countries - Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, and the United States - and how they have been interpreted by their highest courts. It examines whether the courts' interpretive practices have changed over time, the apparent reasons for any changes, and whether the courts apply the same interpretive principles to different areas of constitutional law, such as federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. The book then reflects on the institutional, political, social, and cultural contexts that might help to explain differences between the practices of these courts.",
keywords = "Australia, Canada, Constitutional interpretation, Constitutions, Courts, Federalism, Germany, India, South Africa, United States",
author = "Jeffrey Goldsworthy",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780199226474",
booktitle = "Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study",
publisher = "Oxford University Press, USA",

}

Goldsworthy, J 2010, Introduction. in Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study. Oxford University Press, USA. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001

Introduction. / Goldsworthy, Jeffrey.

Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study. Oxford University Press, USA, 2010.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingForeword / PostscriptOtherpeer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Introduction

AU - Goldsworthy, Jeffrey

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - Much of the controversy surrounding constitutional interpretation concerns two issues. The first is a version of a conundrum that has perplexed lawyers for millennia: should the interpretation of a law he governed mainly by its 'letter', or by its 'spirit'? The second issue is the extent to which the meaning of a constitution can, and should, be determined by the original intentions, purposes, or understandings of its founders. This issue pits so-called 'nonoriginalists' against 'originalists'. This book explores the constitutions of six countries - Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, and the United States - and how they have been interpreted by their highest courts. It examines whether the courts' interpretive practices have changed over time, the apparent reasons for any changes, and whether the courts apply the same interpretive principles to different areas of constitutional law, such as federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. The book then reflects on the institutional, political, social, and cultural contexts that might help to explain differences between the practices of these courts.

AB - Much of the controversy surrounding constitutional interpretation concerns two issues. The first is a version of a conundrum that has perplexed lawyers for millennia: should the interpretation of a law he governed mainly by its 'letter', or by its 'spirit'? The second issue is the extent to which the meaning of a constitution can, and should, be determined by the original intentions, purposes, or understandings of its founders. This issue pits so-called 'nonoriginalists' against 'originalists'. This book explores the constitutions of six countries - Australia, Canada, Germany, India, South Africa, and the United States - and how they have been interpreted by their highest courts. It examines whether the courts' interpretive practices have changed over time, the apparent reasons for any changes, and whether the courts apply the same interpretive principles to different areas of constitutional law, such as federalism, separation of powers, and individual rights. The book then reflects on the institutional, political, social, and cultural contexts that might help to explain differences between the practices of these courts.

KW - Australia

KW - Canada

KW - Constitutional interpretation

KW - Constitutions

KW - Courts

KW - Federalism

KW - Germany

KW - India

KW - South Africa

KW - United States

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920751919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001

DO - 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001

M3 - Foreword / Postscript

SN - 9780199226474

BT - Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study

PB - Oxford University Press, USA

ER -

Goldsworthy J. Introduction. In Interpreting Constitutions: A Comparative Study. Oxford University Press, USA. 2010 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226474.003.0001