This book analyses the unique constitutional system in operation in Thailand as a continuous process of bricolage between various Western constitutional models and Buddhist doctrines of Kingship. Reflecting on the category of 'constitutional monarchy' and its relationship with notions of the rule of law, it investigates the hybridised semi-authoritarian, semi-liberal monarchy that exists in Thailand. By studying constitutional texts and political practices in light of local legal doctrine, the book shows that the monarch's affirmation of extraordinary prerogative powers strongly rests on wider doctrinal claims about constitutionalism and the rule of law. This finding challenges commonly accepted assertions about Thailand, arguing that the King's political role is not the remnant of the 'unfinished' borrowing of Western constitutionalism, general disregard for the law, or cultural preference for 'charismatic authority', as generally thought. Drawing on materials and sources not previously available in English, this important work provides a comprehensive and critical account of the Thai 'mixed constitutional monarchy' from the late 19th century to the present day.

Uniquely blending anthropological and exchange theory, Professor Garvey offers a new interpretation of American constitutional development. His thesis: judicial reliance on a limited stock of received forms has inhibited the development of new concepts that could adequately reflect fundamental changes in society. Professor Garvey reviews the history of the Supreme Court in light of the "bricolage" theory. The Court, by interpreting the Constitution to effect laissez-faire and Social Darwinism, helped bring about a society ostensibly patterned on the buyer-seller model, marked by free exchange and "liberty of contract." New departures by the Court in the areas of free speech and criminal justice, according to the author, evidence a recognition of present inequities and a determination to change them; but to the extent the Court remains loyal to a buyer-seller model, it practices an unrealistic jurisprudence. Originally published in 1971. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

This book of text, cases and materials from Asia is designed for scholars and students of constitutional law and comparative constitutional law. The book is divided into 11 chapters, arranged thematically around key ideas and controversies, enabling the reader to work through the major facets of constitutionalism in the region. The book begins with a lengthy introduction that critically examines the study of constitutional orders in 'Asia', highlighting the histories, colonial influences, and cultural particularities extant in the region. This chapter serves both as a provisional orientation towards the major constitutional developments seen in Asia – both unique and shared with other regions – and as a guide to the controversies encountered in the study of constitutional law in Asia. Each of the following chapters is framed by an introductory essay setting out the issues and succinctly highlighting critical perspectives and themes. The approach is one of 'challenge and response', whereby questions of constitutional importance are posed and the reader is then led, by engaging with primary and secondary materials, through the way the various Asian states respond to these questions and challenges. Chapter segments are accompanied by notes, comments and questions to facilitate critical and comparative analysis, as well as recommendations for further reading.The book presents a representative range of Asian materials from jurisdictions including: Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka , Taiwan, Timor-Leste and the 10 ASEAN states.

Can constitutional amendments be unconstitutional? The problem of 'unconstitutional constitutional amendments' has become one of the most widely debated issues in comparative constitutional theory, constitutional design, and constitutional adjudication. This book describes and analyses the increasing tendency in global constitutionalism to substantively limit formal changes to constitutions. The challenges of constitutional unamendability to constitutional theory become even more complex when constitutional courts enforce such limitations through substantive judicial review of amendments, often resulting in the declaration that these constitutional amendments are 'unconstitutional'. Combining historical comparisons, constitutional theory, and a wide comparative study, Yaniv Roznai sets out to explain what the nature of amendment power is, what its limitations are, and what the role of constitutional courts is and should be when enforcing limitations on constitutional amendments.

Combining theoretical sophistication with a fundamental comprehension of the political institutions of the USA, this study aims to demystify the workings of the United States Supreme Court and its place in democracy.

The migration of constitutional ideas across jurisdictions is one of the central features of contemporary constitutional practice. The increasing use of comparative jurisprudence in interpreting constitutions is one example of this. In this 2007 book, leading figures in the study of comparative constitutionalism and comparative constitutional politics from North America, Europe and Australia discuss the dynamic processes whereby constitutional systems influence each other. They explore basic methodological questions which have thus far received little attention, and examine the complex relationship between national and supranational constitutionalism - an issue of considerable contemporary interest in Europe. The migration of constitutional ideas is discussed from a variety of methodological perspectives - comparative law, comparative politics, and cultural studies of law - and contributors draw on case-studies from a wide variety of jurisdictions: Australia, Hungary, India, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada.

Assesses what we know - and do not know - about comparative constitutional design and particular institutional choices concerning executive power and other issues.