The paper examines the conflict over the control of the integration of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal (CT) that evolved into a constitutional crisis in October 2015 - and has extended for more than two years. It identifies issues that help understand how the Polish Democracy does not impede the erosion of constitutional democracy as the conflict has undermined the CT and the function of judicial review (JR). The article examines issues of legitimacy that emerge from the crisis; it also examines the extent to which the institutional settings condition the operation of the JR function; in particular, it looks at the role of executive actors (the Government and the President), and the role of the political/parliamentary party in bridging the separation of powers.

In American legal historiography, the debate concerning the exact contours and reforms of the Progressive Era is still ongoing. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the American reform movements tried to match American ideals with the challenges of the times. Although progressive attitudes toward the economy, taxation, foreign policy, labor law, social standards, human rights, women’s suffrage, rapid urbanization and unrestricted immigration highlighted the necessity of reforms, such progress was seen from a variety of perspectives. We may ask the question if American legal thought that time was really progressive. The jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court profoundly influenced the shape of the legal order in economic and labor law. Unfortunately, some decisions were not compatible with the visions of progressive reformers and reflected the ideological attitudes of the justices rather than an aspiration for reform.

Sovereignty of Parliament and Stability of Great Britain’s Political System in the Perspective of Consequences of the Brexit

Regime changes that occurred in Great Britain as the effect of Brexit have led to explicit reactivation of the sovereignty of parliament principle. Main warrant of political stability is identified with the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Main hypothesis of this article is that stabilizing activities that are undertaken by this institution influence three possible layers: stabilizing the community, political system and authorities. This overgrowth of competences can affect constitutional fundamentals of the regime. Probable effect of this ongoing process of changes will be endeavours to codify a constitution. Method that is employed in this paper is a method of system analysis, which seems to be the most adequate approach for researches of political stability. Considerations presented in the paper are included within the remit of political theory, political comparativism and constitutional systems.

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the American reform movements tried to match American ideals with the challenges of the times. Progressive attitudes highlighted the necessity of reforms. The Chinese issue, often risen in the public dialogue, was the subject of deliberation of the Supreme Court, the Congress, and the federal executive branch of government. Chae Chan Ping v. United States and subsequent cases established the doctrine of consular noneviewability referring to immigration law and delineating the scope of judicial review for decisions concerning the admission of immigrants to the United States. They also strengthened the plenary power doctrine. We may ask if the Supreme Court judgments were in conformity with the ideas of American Progressivism. Unfortunately, the Chinese Exclusion Cases were not compatible with the visions of progressive reformers and reflected anti-Chinese sentiment rather than an aspiration for reforms.