Michigan Law Review 101 (2003): 201-237.
In this Article, I explore the question of why constitutional review, but not American judicial review, spread across Europe. I will also argue that, despite obvious organic differences between the American and European systems of review, there is an increasing convergence in how review actually operates. I proceed as follows. In Part I, I examine the debate on establishing judicial review in Europe, focusing on the French. In Parts II and III, I contrast the European and the American models of review, and briefly discuss why the Kelsenian constitutional court diffused across Europe. In Part IV, I argue that despite important formal, institutional distinctions, there is increasing convergence in how the two systems of review actually operate.
Date of Authorship for this Version
Sweet, Alec Stone, "Why Europe Rejected American Judicial Review and Why it May Not Matter" (2003). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 81.