Titulo:
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos
.
Sumario:
La idea moderna de Constitución se relaciona con tendencias culturales específicas de tradición y revolución. En ese sentido, dentro del estudio del derecho constitucional comparado las referencias al sistema institucional de Estados Unidos son constantes, dados sus aportes al constitucionalismo contemporáneo y a la noción de Constitución escrita moderna. La reforma constitucional, por tanto, surge como objeto de interés. Sin embargo, cabe anotar que siendo un sistema constitucional jurisprudencial –es decir, en donde las interpretaciones de los tribunales acerca de la Constitución pesan sobre el texto de la misma–, habrá entonces que estudiar las decisiones de la Corte Suprema relativas a la reforma constitucional. Y el alto tribunal se ha... Ver más
Guardado en:
1794-2918
2590-8928
11
2014-01-01
237
261
Revista Jurídicas - 2014
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
| id |
oai:revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co:article_4853 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| spelling |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos Tradition and revolution: An approximation to the culture of constitutional reform in the United States La idea moderna de Constitución se relaciona con tendencias culturales específicas de tradición y revolución. En ese sentido, dentro del estudio del derecho constitucional comparado las referencias al sistema institucional de Estados Unidos son constantes, dados sus aportes al constitucionalismo contemporáneo y a la noción de Constitución escrita moderna. La reforma constitucional, por tanto, surge como objeto de interés. Sin embargo, cabe anotar que siendo un sistema constitucional jurisprudencial –es decir, en donde las interpretaciones de los tribunales acerca de la Constitución pesan sobre el texto de la misma–, habrá entonces que estudiar las decisiones de la Corte Suprema relativas a la reforma constitucional. Y el alto tribunal se ha pronunciado en contadas ocasiones, siempre sosteniendo la validez de las reformas y mostrando deferencia hacia el poder reformador. Pero, dado que el sistema institucional estadounidense consta además de 50 Estados con sus constituciones respectivas, es pertinente también reseñar decisiones judiciales estatales concernientes a reformas constitucionales en dicho nivel; en contraste con pronunciamientos federales, las cortes estatales se han empeñado en un intenso activismo judicial que ha resultado en un control tanto formal como material. The modern idea of Constitution is related to specific cultural trends of tradition and revolution. In this sense, within the study of compared constitutional Law references to the American institutional system are common because its contributions to both, contemporary constitutionalism and the notion of modern written Constitution. The constitutional reform, in consequence, emerges as an object of interest. However, it should be noted that being a law-constitutional system – this is to say where the court interpretations about the Constitution prevail over the constitutional text itself –, then there will be a need to study the Supreme Court decisions regarding constitutional reform. And the High Court has ruled on rare occasions, always upholding the reforms validity and showing deference to the reforming power. But, since the North American institutional system comprises 50 States with their respective constitutions, it is relevant also to review State courtdecisions related to constitutional reforms at that level. In contrast with federal pronouncements, the State courts have insisted on an intense judicial activism, which has resulted in control both formal and material. González Quintero, Rodrigo cultura constitucional reforma constitucional Estados Unidos control judicial constitutional culture constitutional reform United States judicial review - 11 1 Núm. 1 , Año 2014 : Enero - Junio Artículo de revista Journal article 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z 2014-01-01 application/pdf Universidad de Caldas Jurídicas 1794-2918 2590-8928 https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/4853 https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/4853 spa https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Revista Jurídicas - 2014 237 261 Ackerman, B. (1991). We the People. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Amar, A. (1988). “Philadelphia Revisited: Amending the Constitution outside Article V”. University of Chicago Law Review. Vol. 55. University of Chicago. Bickel, A. (1986). The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press. Brennan, W. (1985). “The Constitution of the United States: Contemporary Ratification”. The South Texas Law, Review. Vol. 27. South Texas College of Law. Carbonell, M. (1998). Constitución, Reforma Constitucional y Fuentes del Derecho. México D.F.: UNAM. Dellinger, W. (1983). “The Legitimacy of Constitutional Change: Rethinking the Amendment Process”. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 97. Harvard University. Denning, B. (1998). “Means to Amend: Theories of Constitutional Change”. Tennessee Law Review. Vol. 65. The University of Tennessee. De Vega, P. (1985). La Reforma Constitucional y la problemática del Poder Constituyente. Madrid: Tecnos. Dinan, J. (2012). “State Constitutions and American Political Development”. En: Tarr, A. y Burgess, M. (eds.). Constitutional dynamics in Federal Systems. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Ely, J. (1980). Democracy and Distrust. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Eule, J. (1989-1990). “Judicial Review of Direct Democracy”. Yale Law Journal. Vol. 99. Yale University. Gant, S. (1997-1998). “Judicial Supremacy and Non-judicial Interpretation of the Constitution”. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. Vol. 24. University of California-Hastings College of Law. García de Enterría, E. (2006). La Constitución como Norma y el Tribunal Constitucional. Madrid: Thomson-Civitas. Hensel, S. (2012). “Constitutional Cultures in the Atlantic World during the Age of Revolutions”. En: Hensel, S. y Bock, U. (eds.). Constitutional Cultures: On the Concept and Representation of Constitutions in the Atlantic World. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Hernández Valle, R. (1993). “El Poder Constituyente Derivado y los Límites Jurídicos al Poder de Reforma Constitucional”. Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional. No. 37. Hughes, C. (1908). Addresses and Papers of Charles Evans Hughes, Governor of New York 1906-1908. New York: Putman’s Sons. Jiménez Asencio, R. (2005). El Constitucionalismo. Madrid: Marcial Pons. Kay, R. (1998). “American Constitutionalism”. En: Alexander, L. (ed.). Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Komesar, N. (1986-1987). “Back to the Future: An Institutional view of making and interpreting Constitutions. Northwestern University Law Review. Vol. 81. Northwestern University. Kyvig, D. (1996). Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776-1995. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ________. (2000). “Arranging for Amendment: Unintended Outcomes of Constitutional Design”. En: Kyvig, D. (ed.). Unintended Outcomes of Constitutional Amendment. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Levinson, S. (2012). Framed: America’s Fifty One Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press. Llewellyn, K. (1934). “The Constitution as an Institution”. Columbia Law Review. No. 1, Vol. 34. Columbia University. Lutz, D. (1996). “Patterns in the Amending of American State Constitutions”. En: Tarr, A. (ed.). Constitutional Politics in the States. Westport: Greenwood Press. Mazzone, J. (2004-2005). “Unamendments”. Iowa Law Review. Vol. 90. University of Iowa. Murphy, W. (1978). “The Art of Constitutional Interpretation”. En: Harmon, J. (ed.). Essays on the Constitution of the United States. Port Washington: National University Publications. ________. (1989). The Nature of the American Constitution. Urbana-Champaign: Department of Political Science-University of Illinois. ________. (2007). Constitutional Democracy: Creating and Maintaining a Just Political Order. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pérez Royo, J. (1987). La Reforma de la Constitución. Madrid: Congreso de los Diputados. Ramírez Cleves, G. (2003). Los Límites a la Reforma Constitucional y las Garantías-Límites del Poder Constituyente. Bogotá: Universidad Externado. Row, D. (1990-1991). “When Words mean what they we believe that say: the case of Article V”. Iowa Law Review. Vol. 76. University of Iowa. Smith, J. (1995). The Republic of Letters: The Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and James Madison 1776-1826. New York: Northon and Company. Strauss, D. (2010). The Living Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tarr, A. (1998). Understanding State Constitutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ________. (2006). “Introduction”. En: Tarr, A. y Williams, R. (eds.). State Constitutions for the twenty-first Century. Albany: State University of New York Press. Tribe, L. (1983). “A Constitution we are Amending: In defense of a restrained Judicial Role”. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 97. Harvard University. ________. (2008). The Invisible Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press. Tushnet, M. (1999). Taking the Constitution away from the Courts. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ________. (2009). The Constitution of the United States of America: A contextual analysis. Portland: Hart Publishing. Van Alstyne, W. (1987). “The Idea of Constitution as Hard Law”. Journal of Legal Education. Vol. 37. Southwestern Law School. Vile, J. (2013). “Constitutional Revision in the United States of America”. En: Contiades, X. (ed.). Engineering Constitutional Change: A Comparative Perspective. New York: Routledge. Vorlander, H. (2012). “What is a Constitutional Culture?”. En: Hensel, S. y Bock, U. (eds.). Constitutional Cultures: On the Concept and Representation of Constitutions in the Atlantic World. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Jurisprudencia Estatal Livermore v. Waite, 36 P. 424 (1894). McCullers v. Williamson, 144 S.E.2d 911 (1965). Adams v. Gunter, 238 So.2d 824 (1970). Amador v. State Board of Equalization, 583 P.2d 1281 (1978). Bess v. Ulmer, 985 P.2d 979 (1999). Jurisprudencia Federal Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221 (1920). Dillon v. Gloss 256 U.S. 368 (1921). United States v. Sprague 282 U.S. 716 (1931). Coleman v. Miller 307 U.S. 433 (1939). Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958). https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/download/4853/4432 info:eu-repo/semantics/article http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 Text Publication |
| institution |
UNIVERSIDAD DE CALDAS |
| thumbnail |
https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADDECALDAS/logo.png |
| country_str |
Colombia |
| collection |
Jurídicas |
| title |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos |
| spellingShingle |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos González Quintero, Rodrigo cultura constitucional reforma constitucional Estados Unidos control judicial constitutional culture constitutional reform United States judicial review |
| title_short |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos |
| title_full |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos |
| title_fullStr |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Tradición y revolución: Aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en Estados Unidos |
| title_sort |
tradición y revolución: aproximación a la cultura de la reforma constitucional en estados unidos |
| title_eng |
Tradition and revolution: An approximation to the culture of constitutional reform in the United States |
| description |
La idea moderna de Constitución se relaciona con tendencias culturales específicas de tradición y revolución. En ese sentido, dentro del estudio del derecho constitucional comparado las referencias al sistema institucional de Estados Unidos son constantes, dados sus aportes al constitucionalismo contemporáneo y a la noción de Constitución escrita moderna. La reforma constitucional, por tanto, surge como objeto de interés. Sin embargo, cabe anotar que siendo un sistema constitucional jurisprudencial –es decir, en donde las interpretaciones de los tribunales acerca de la Constitución pesan sobre el texto de la misma–, habrá entonces que estudiar las decisiones de la Corte Suprema relativas a la reforma constitucional. Y el alto tribunal se ha pronunciado en contadas ocasiones, siempre sosteniendo la validez de las reformas y mostrando deferencia hacia el poder reformador. Pero, dado que el sistema institucional estadounidense consta además de 50 Estados con sus constituciones respectivas, es pertinente también reseñar decisiones judiciales estatales concernientes a reformas constitucionales en dicho nivel; en contraste con pronunciamientos federales, las cortes estatales se han empeñado en un intenso activismo judicial que ha resultado en un control tanto formal como material.
|
| description_eng |
The modern idea of Constitution is related to specific cultural trends of tradition and revolution. In this sense, within the study of compared constitutional Law references to the American institutional system are common because its contributions to both, contemporary constitutionalism and the notion of modern written Constitution. The constitutional reform, in consequence, emerges as an object of interest. However, it should be noted that being a law-constitutional system – this is to say where the court interpretations about the Constitution prevail over the constitutional text itself –, then there will be a need to study the Supreme Court decisions regarding constitutional reform. And the High Court has ruled on rare occasions, always upholding the reforms validity and showing deference to the reforming power. But, since the North American institutional system comprises 50 States with their respective constitutions, it is relevant also to review State courtdecisions related to constitutional reforms at that level. In contrast with federal pronouncements, the State courts have insisted on an intense judicial activism, which has resulted in control both formal and material.
|
| author |
González Quintero, Rodrigo |
| author_facet |
González Quintero, Rodrigo |
| topicspa_str_mv |
cultura constitucional reforma constitucional Estados Unidos control judicial |
| topic |
cultura constitucional reforma constitucional Estados Unidos control judicial constitutional culture constitutional reform United States judicial review |
| topic_facet |
cultura constitucional reforma constitucional Estados Unidos control judicial constitutional culture constitutional reform United States judicial review |
| citationvolume |
11 |
| citationissue |
1 |
| citationedition |
Núm. 1 , Año 2014 : Enero - Junio |
| publisher |
Universidad de Caldas |
| ispartofjournal |
Jurídicas |
| source |
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/4853 |
| language |
spa |
| format |
Article |
| rights |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Revista Jurídicas - 2014 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| references |
Ackerman, B. (1991). We the People. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Amar, A. (1988). “Philadelphia Revisited: Amending the Constitution outside Article V”. University of Chicago Law Review. Vol. 55. University of Chicago. Bickel, A. (1986). The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press. Brennan, W. (1985). “The Constitution of the United States: Contemporary Ratification”. The South Texas Law, Review. Vol. 27. South Texas College of Law. Carbonell, M. (1998). Constitución, Reforma Constitucional y Fuentes del Derecho. México D.F.: UNAM. Dellinger, W. (1983). “The Legitimacy of Constitutional Change: Rethinking the Amendment Process”. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 97. Harvard University. Denning, B. (1998). “Means to Amend: Theories of Constitutional Change”. Tennessee Law Review. Vol. 65. The University of Tennessee. De Vega, P. (1985). La Reforma Constitucional y la problemática del Poder Constituyente. Madrid: Tecnos. Dinan, J. (2012). “State Constitutions and American Political Development”. En: Tarr, A. y Burgess, M. (eds.). Constitutional dynamics in Federal Systems. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Ely, J. (1980). Democracy and Distrust. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Eule, J. (1989-1990). “Judicial Review of Direct Democracy”. Yale Law Journal. Vol. 99. Yale University. Gant, S. (1997-1998). “Judicial Supremacy and Non-judicial Interpretation of the Constitution”. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. Vol. 24. University of California-Hastings College of Law. García de Enterría, E. (2006). La Constitución como Norma y el Tribunal Constitucional. Madrid: Thomson-Civitas. Hensel, S. (2012). “Constitutional Cultures in the Atlantic World during the Age of Revolutions”. En: Hensel, S. y Bock, U. (eds.). Constitutional Cultures: On the Concept and Representation of Constitutions in the Atlantic World. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Hernández Valle, R. (1993). “El Poder Constituyente Derivado y los Límites Jurídicos al Poder de Reforma Constitucional”. Revista Española de Derecho Constitucional. No. 37. Hughes, C. (1908). Addresses and Papers of Charles Evans Hughes, Governor of New York 1906-1908. New York: Putman’s Sons. Jiménez Asencio, R. (2005). El Constitucionalismo. Madrid: Marcial Pons. Kay, R. (1998). “American Constitutionalism”. En: Alexander, L. (ed.). Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Komesar, N. (1986-1987). “Back to the Future: An Institutional view of making and interpreting Constitutions. Northwestern University Law Review. Vol. 81. Northwestern University. Kyvig, D. (1996). Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776-1995. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ________. (2000). “Arranging for Amendment: Unintended Outcomes of Constitutional Design”. En: Kyvig, D. (ed.). Unintended Outcomes of Constitutional Amendment. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Levinson, S. (2012). Framed: America’s Fifty One Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press. Llewellyn, K. (1934). “The Constitution as an Institution”. Columbia Law Review. No. 1, Vol. 34. Columbia University. Lutz, D. (1996). “Patterns in the Amending of American State Constitutions”. En: Tarr, A. (ed.). Constitutional Politics in the States. Westport: Greenwood Press. Mazzone, J. (2004-2005). “Unamendments”. Iowa Law Review. Vol. 90. University of Iowa. Murphy, W. (1978). “The Art of Constitutional Interpretation”. En: Harmon, J. (ed.). Essays on the Constitution of the United States. Port Washington: National University Publications. ________. (1989). The Nature of the American Constitution. Urbana-Champaign: Department of Political Science-University of Illinois. ________. (2007). Constitutional Democracy: Creating and Maintaining a Just Political Order. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Pérez Royo, J. (1987). La Reforma de la Constitución. Madrid: Congreso de los Diputados. Ramírez Cleves, G. (2003). Los Límites a la Reforma Constitucional y las Garantías-Límites del Poder Constituyente. Bogotá: Universidad Externado. Row, D. (1990-1991). “When Words mean what they we believe that say: the case of Article V”. Iowa Law Review. Vol. 76. University of Iowa. Smith, J. (1995). The Republic of Letters: The Correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and James Madison 1776-1826. New York: Northon and Company. Strauss, D. (2010). The Living Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tarr, A. (1998). Understanding State Constitutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ________. (2006). “Introduction”. En: Tarr, A. y Williams, R. (eds.). State Constitutions for the twenty-first Century. Albany: State University of New York Press. Tribe, L. (1983). “A Constitution we are Amending: In defense of a restrained Judicial Role”. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 97. Harvard University. ________. (2008). The Invisible Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press. Tushnet, M. (1999). Taking the Constitution away from the Courts. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ________. (2009). The Constitution of the United States of America: A contextual analysis. Portland: Hart Publishing. Van Alstyne, W. (1987). “The Idea of Constitution as Hard Law”. Journal of Legal Education. Vol. 37. Southwestern Law School. Vile, J. (2013). “Constitutional Revision in the United States of America”. En: Contiades, X. (ed.). Engineering Constitutional Change: A Comparative Perspective. New York: Routledge. Vorlander, H. (2012). “What is a Constitutional Culture?”. En: Hensel, S. y Bock, U. (eds.). Constitutional Cultures: On the Concept and Representation of Constitutions in the Atlantic World. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Jurisprudencia Estatal Livermore v. Waite, 36 P. 424 (1894). McCullers v. Williamson, 144 S.E.2d 911 (1965). Adams v. Gunter, 238 So.2d 824 (1970). Amador v. State Board of Equalization, 583 P.2d 1281 (1978). Bess v. Ulmer, 985 P.2d 979 (1999). Jurisprudencia Federal Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221 (1920). Dillon v. Gloss 256 U.S. 368 (1921). United States v. Sprague 282 U.S. 716 (1931). Coleman v. Miller 307 U.S. 433 (1939). Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958). |
| type_driver |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| type_coar |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 |
| type_version |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| type_coarversion |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| type_content |
Text |
| publishDate |
2014-01-01 |
| date_accessioned |
2014-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| date_available |
2014-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| url |
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/4853 |
| url_doi |
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/view/4853 |
| issn |
1794-2918 |
| eissn |
2590-8928 |
| citationstartpage |
237 |
| citationendpage |
261 |
| url2_str_mv |
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/juridicas/article/download/4853/4432 |
| _version_ |
1811199584647512064 |