Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych

  • Znaczenie doktryny stare decisis dla sądowej kontroli konstytucyjności prawa USA – między stabilnością orzecznictwa a instrumentalizmem

    Author: Diana Pustuła
    E-mail: diana.pustula@doctoral.uj.edu.pl
    Institution: Uniwersytet Jagielloński
    ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6627-4520
    Year of publication: 2019
    Source: Show
    Pages: 79-91
    DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2019.03.04
    PDF: ppk/49/ppk4904.pdf

    All American courts have a right to examine the conformity of legal acts with the Constitution as the basis for issuing a decision, creating a diffused system of judicial review. Court precedents and the stare decisis doctrine become the stabilizing factor of jurisprudence. However, it is not easy to make an unequivocal assessment of the role of the stare decisis doctrine for judicial review due to a number of factors that affect its significance. They include the formal lack of absolute nature of the court decisions, or the fact that the Federal US Supreme Court is not bound by its own rulings. The latter fact seems particularly important in the assessment of the subject matter in the context of considerable judicial activism and the way the judges are nominated and approved for, in principle, lifetime positions. In this publication, all the above-mentioned factors have been analyzed in order to assess the significance of the stare decisis doctrine for judicial review in the US as accurately as possible.

  • Odsunięcie prezydenta od władzy na mocy XXV Poprawki do amerykańskiej Konstytucji

    Author: Izabela Kraśnicka
    E-mail: krasnicka@uwb.edu.pl
    Institution: Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
    ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9684-6681
    Year of publication: 2021
    Source: Show
    Pages: 319-330
    DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2021.03.21
    PDF: ppk/61/ppk6121.pdf

    Replacement of the President in Office under the XXVth Amendment to the US Constitution

    The situation, unprecedented in the history of the United States, of launching the impeachment procedure for the second time during one term of office against a sitting president was preceded by an attempt to use another mechanism for removing a head of state from office, namely the mechanism provided for in the XXV th Amendment to the Constitution. The purpose of this article is to analyze Section 4 of the XXV th Amendment, in light of the January 2021 events that took place on Capitol Hill. The methods used during the work include: historical, dogmatic-legal and linguistic method. The conclusions support the presumed thesis that, compared to impeachment proceedings, the XXV th Amendment mechanism is a faster process that does not require indictments or Congressional proceedings. However, it requires a particularly politically difficult decision by the vice president acting in consultation with the heads of departments of the American government, fraught with potential consequences should the ousted President return to power, in view of the administration’s total dependence on the decisions of the head of state. It is these circumstances that must be considered the reasons why the provisions under consideration have not been applied in practice.

Wiadomość do:



© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart