Living Dead Constitutionalism or Why Old Constitutional Worlds Are Never Lost for Good: A Comment on Rosalind Dixon’s Responsive Judicial Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21991/cf29494Abstract
This review essay reflects on Canadian antecedents and inspirations for Rosalind Dixon’s comparative political process theory. The first section focuses on the articulation of two theories of judicial review under the Charter by Patrick Monahan and Kent Roach that intersect at many points with Dixon’s own account of constitutional review under a written bill of rights. The second section then turns to elements of the Canadian pre-Charter experience that were missed or neglected by those theories and shows why Dixon’s theory nicely captures their internal logic, while the third section returns to the tensions and complexity of Canadian constitutional culture identified by Cairns. Neither solved nor gone, these tensions are revealing of a limitation — or at least an unstated assumption — in most normative theories of judicial review based on deliberative accounts of constitutionalism, including Dixon’s own.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jean-Christophe Bedard Rubin

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Constitutional Forum constitutionnel grant the journal the right of first publication, and agree to license the work under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) that allows others to share the work for non-commercial purposes, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal, as long as no changes are made to the original work. Please use this format to attribute this work to Constitutional Forum constitutionnel:
"First published as: Title of Article, Contributor, Constitutional Forum constitutionnel Volume/Issue, Copyright © [year], Publisher"


