O mito de Marbury v. Madison: a questão da fundação da supremacia judicial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v5i3.56030Keywords:
Marbury v. Madison, supremacia judicial, judicial review, constitucionalismo popular, departamentalismo.Abstract
Marbury desempenha um importante papel no debate sobre a legitimidade do judicial review no sistema constitucional norte-americano. Diante disso, o artigo objetiva analisar teses críticas ao uso retórico do caso com o objetivo principal de desconstruir o mito de Marbury que garantiu que o tornasse a principal fonte de reivindicação da supremacia judicial. Para tanto, analisa contribuições revisionistas a fim de identificar a atual e real causa do louvor à decisão. Tem enquanto foco demonstrar como as citações de Marbury pela Suprema Corte não são apenas para justificar o judicial review em casos controversos, mas principalmente para afirmar a superioridade ou exclusividade judicial na interpretação constitucional. No final, a análise histórica dos aspectos políticos do caso permite uma leitura contextualizada, restando claro que a decisão de Marshall afastou-se da doutrina da supremacia judicial para adotar uma postura consistente com as premissas do constitucionalismo popular.
References
ALSTYNE, William Van. A Critical Guide to Marbury v. Madison. Duke Law Journal, vol. 18, p. 1-47, 1969.
BICKEL. Alexander. The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court At The Bar Of Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962.
CHEMERINSKY, Erwin. Federal Jurisdiction. New York: Aspen Publishers, 2007.
CLINTON, Robert Lowry. Marbury V. Madison and Judicial Review. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1989.
DOUGLAS, Davison. The Rhetorical Use Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of a "Great Case". Wake Forest Law Review, vol. 38, p. 375-413, 2003.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Freedom’s Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996.
FRIEDMAN, Barry. The Myths of Marbury. In: TUSHNET, Mark. (Ed.). Arguing Marbury v. Madison. California: Stanford University Press, 2005.
FRIEDMAN. Barry. The Will Of The People: How Public Opinion Has Influenced The Supreme Court And Shaped The Meaning Of The Constitution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009.
GRABER, Mark. Establishing judicial review: Marbury and the judicial act of 1789. Tulsa Law Review, v. 38, n. 4, p. 609-650, 2003.
GRIFFIN, Stephen. The Age of Marbury: Judicial Review in a Democracy of Rights. In: TUSHNET, Mark. (Ed.). Arguing Marbury v. Madison. California: Stanford University Press, 2005
KENT, James. An Introductory Lecture To A Course Of Law Lectures, New York: Printed by Francis Childs, 1794. Disponível Em: <https://books.google.com.br/books?isbn=1886363919>. Acesso em 09 de mai. 2017.
KLARMAN, Michael. How Great were the 'Great' Marshall Court Decisions?. Virginia Law Review, vol. 87, p. 1111-1154, oct., 2001.
KRAMER, Larry. "The Interest of the Man": James Madison, Popular Constitutionalism, and the Theory of Deliberative Democracy. Valparaiso University Law Review, vol. 41, n. 2, p. 697-754, winter, 2006.
KRAMER, Larry. Generating Constitutional Meaning. California Law Review, vol. 94, n. 5, p. 1439-1453, oct. 2006.
KRAMER, Larry. Marbury And The Reatreat From Judicial Supremacy. Constitutional Commentary, Vol. 20, n. 2, p. 205-230, summer, 2003.
KRAMER, Larry. Popular Constitutionalism, Circa 2004. California Law Review, vol. 92, n. 4, p. 959-1011, jul. 2004.
KRAMER, Larry. The Pace and Cause of Change. Marshall Law Review, vol. 37, n. 2, p. 357-389, winter, 2004.
KRAMER, Larry. The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
KRAMER, Larry. The Supreme Court 2000 Term: Foreword: We the Court. Harvard Law Review, vol. 115, p. 4-169, jan., 2001.
MCREE, Griffith John. Life and Correspondence of James Iredell: One of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, D. Appleton, 1857. Disponível em: <https://books.google.com.br/books?id=e1F7AAAAMAAJ>. Acesso em 09 mai. 2017.
O'FALLON, James. Marbury. Stanford Law Review, vol. 44, n. 2, jan. p. 219-260, 1992.
RAKOVE, Jack. The Origins of Judicial Review: A Plea for New Contexts. Stanford Law Review, vol. 49, p. 1060-64, 1997.
RUGER, Theodore. "A Question Which Convulses A Nation": The Early Republic's Greatest Debate About Judicial Review Power. Harvard Law Review, vol. 117, p. 826-890, 2004.
SNOWISS, Sylvia. Judicial Review and the Law of the Constitution. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1990
The Federalist Papers, n. 78, 1788. Disponível em: <https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers>. Acesso em 09 mai. 2017.
TREANOR, William Michael. Judicial Review Before Marbury. Stanford Law Review, vol. 58, p. 455-462, 2005.
WHITTINGTON, Keith. Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation: Three Objections and Responses. North Carolina Law Review, vol. 80, n. 3, p. 773-852, 2002.
WHITTINGTON, Keith. Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007.
WHITTINGTON, Keith; RINDERLE, Amanda. Making A Mountain Out Of A Molehill? Marbury And The Construction Of The Constitutional Canon. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly, Forthcoming, fev. 2012. Disponível em: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2003083>. Acesso em 09 mai 2017.
WOLFE, Christopher. The Rise Of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation To Judge-Made Law, New York: Basic, 1986.
WOOD, Gordon. The Origins Of Judicial Review Revisited, Or How The Marshall Court Made More Out Of Less. Washington & Lee Law Review, vol. 56, n. 3, p. 787-803, 1999.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Constitutional Research the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International which allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their personal website) at any point before or during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and the citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).
