Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Direito GV |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800 |
Resumo: | THERE APPEARS TO BE A WIDESPREAD ASSUMPTION AMONG THOSE WHO DEFEND BALANCING IN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE IDEA OF RIGHTS AS TRUMPS, BECAUSE PUBLIC INTERESTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE TO BE BALANCED WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF PRE-FIXED PRIORITY OR LEXICAL ORDERING. MY PURPOSE IN THIS ARTICLE IS TO SHOW THAT BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING ARE NOT ONLY COMPATIBLE, BUT POSSIBLY COMPLEMENTARY. WHAT I WILL ARGUE IS THAT IT IS NOT ONLY POSSIBLE TO HAVE A WORKABLE ARRANGEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT INCORPORATES BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING, BUT IT IS ALSO BETTER AND MORE PLAUSIBLE IF WE HAVE ONE. |
id |
FGV-2_0fadcb0ac06394902980ce468cdadd9a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/56800 |
network_acronym_str |
FGV-2 |
network_name_str |
Revista Direito GV |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable?Os direitos como trunfos e o sopesamento: reconciliando o irreconciliável?TRUMPSBALANCINGCONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTSLEXICAL PRIORITY.TRUNFOSSOPESAMENTODIREITOS FUNDAMENTAISPRIORIDADE LEXICALTHERE APPEARS TO BE A WIDESPREAD ASSUMPTION AMONG THOSE WHO DEFEND BALANCING IN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE IDEA OF RIGHTS AS TRUMPS, BECAUSE PUBLIC INTERESTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE TO BE BALANCED WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF PRE-FIXED PRIORITY OR LEXICAL ORDERING. MY PURPOSE IN THIS ARTICLE IS TO SHOW THAT BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING ARE NOT ONLY COMPATIBLE, BUT POSSIBLY COMPLEMENTARY. WHAT I WILL ARGUE IS THAT IT IS NOT ONLY POSSIBLE TO HAVE A WORKABLE ARRANGEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT INCORPORATES BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING, BUT IT IS ALSO BETTER AND MORE PLAUSIBLE IF WE HAVE ONE. UMA PREMISSA PARECE TER-SE DIFUNDIDO ENTRE OS DEFENSORES DO SOPESAMENTO DE DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS: A PREMISSA DE QUE O SOPESAMENTO SERIA INCOMPATÍVEL COM A IDEIA DE DIREITOS COMO TRUNFOS. ISSO PORQUE OS INTERESSES PÚBLICOS E OS DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS DEVERIAM SER SOPESADOS SEM QUALQUER TIPO DE PRIORIDADE FIXA OU ORDENAÇÃO LEXICAL. O PROPÓSITO DESTE ARTIGO É MOSTRAR QUE O SOPESAMENTO E O CARÁTER DE TRUNFO DOS DIREITOS SÃO NÃO APENAS COMPATÍVEIS, MAS TAMBÉM COMPLEMENTARES. DEFENDE-SE, POIS, QUE SE PODE CONCEBER UMA ESTRUTURA DE DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS QUE INTEGRE A IDEIA DE TRUNFO E O SOPESAMENTO; E QUE É MELHOR E MAIS PLAUSÍVEL QUE ADOTEMOS ESSA ESTRUTURA.Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas2015-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800Revista Direito GV; Vol. 11 No. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-187Revista Direito GV; Vol. 11 Núm. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-187Revista Direito GV; v. 11 n. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-1872317-6172reponame:Revista Direito GVinstname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVenghttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800/55336Copyright (c) 2015 Revista DIREITO GVinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCosta Neto, João2019-08-19T16:33:31Zoai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/56800Revistahttps://direitosp.fgv.br/publicacoes/revista/revista-direito-gvPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br2317-61721808-2432opendoar:2019-08-19T16:33:31Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? Os direitos como trunfos e o sopesamento: reconciliando o irreconciliável? |
title |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
spellingShingle |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? Costa Neto, João TRUMPS BALANCING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEXICAL PRIORITY. TRUNFOS SOPESAMENTO DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS PRIORIDADE LEXICAL |
title_short |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
title_full |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
title_fullStr |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
title_sort |
Rights as trumps and balancing: reconciling the rreconcilable? |
author |
Costa Neto, João |
author_facet |
Costa Neto, João |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Costa Neto, João |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
TRUMPS BALANCING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEXICAL PRIORITY. TRUNFOS SOPESAMENTO DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS PRIORIDADE LEXICAL |
topic |
TRUMPS BALANCING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS LEXICAL PRIORITY. TRUNFOS SOPESAMENTO DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS PRIORIDADE LEXICAL |
description |
THERE APPEARS TO BE A WIDESPREAD ASSUMPTION AMONG THOSE WHO DEFEND BALANCING IN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE IDEA OF RIGHTS AS TRUMPS, BECAUSE PUBLIC INTERESTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE TO BE BALANCED WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF PRE-FIXED PRIORITY OR LEXICAL ORDERING. MY PURPOSE IN THIS ARTICLE IS TO SHOW THAT BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING ARE NOT ONLY COMPATIBLE, BUT POSSIBLY COMPLEMENTARY. WHAT I WILL ARGUE IS THAT IT IS NOT ONLY POSSIBLE TO HAVE A WORKABLE ARRANGEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT INCORPORATES BOTH TRUMPING AND BALANCING, BUT IT IS ALSO BETTER AND MORE PLAUSIBLE IF WE HAVE ONE. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800 |
url |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/56800/55336 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Revista DIREITO GV info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Revista DIREITO GV |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direito GV; Vol. 11 No. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-187 Revista Direito GV; Vol. 11 Núm. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-187 Revista Direito GV; v. 11 n. 1 (2015): jan.-jun. (21); 159-187 2317-6172 reponame:Revista Direito GV instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) instacron:FGV |
instname_str |
Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
instacron_str |
FGV |
institution |
FGV |
reponame_str |
Revista Direito GV |
collection |
Revista Direito GV |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br |
_version_ |
1798943709656514560 |