MétaCan
← all works

Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism

2008· article· en· 477 citations· W2137292845 on OpenAlex

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

About CanadaIts subject is Canada, wherever its authors sit.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread
0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Over the past fifty years, proportionality balancingan analytical procedure akin to "strict scrutiny" in the United States-has become a dominant technique of rights adjudication in the world. From German origins, proportionality analysis spread across Europe, into Commonwealth systems (Canada, New Zealand, South Africa), and Israel; it has also migrated to treaty-based regimes, including the European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the World Trade Organization. Part 11 proposes a theory of why judges are attracted to the procedure, an account that blends strategic and normative elements. Parts III and IV provide a genealogy of proportionality, trace its global diffusion, and evaluate its impact on law and politics in a variety of settings, both national and supranational. In the conclusion, we discuss our major finding, namely, that proportionality constitutes a doctrinal underpinning for the expansion ofjudicial power globally. Although there is significant variation in how it is used, judges who adopt proportionality position themselves to exercise dominance over policymaking and constitutional development.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Field
Social Sciences
Canadian institutions
Funders
Keywords
Proportionality (law)ConstitutionalismTreatyPolitical scienceAdjudicationCommonwealthScrutinyHuman rightsLawUnderpinningEuropean unionPoliticsLaw and economicsDemocracySociologyEconomicsInternational trade
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes