Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws

Annexation of local governments is a contentious topic. Litigation of annexation often addresses important constitutional provisions, such as property rights, federalism, limitations to police powers, equality and, more specifically, the Voting Rights Act. The United States Constitution is famously...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Carolina Arlota
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Bologna 2017-11-01
Series:University of Bologna Law Review
Subjects:
Online Access:https://bolognalawreview.unibo.it/article/view/7493
id doaj-03305f10d3ed4fc9a3e4987ed8395764
record_format Article
spelling doaj-03305f10d3ed4fc9a3e4987ed83957642020-11-24T22:24:03ZengUniversity of BolognaUniversity of Bologna Law Review2531-61332017-11-012214918610.6092/issn.2531-6133/74936707Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation LawsCarolina Arlota0University of OklahomaAnnexation of local governments is a contentious topic. Litigation of annexation often addresses important constitutional provisions, such as property rights, federalism, limitations to police powers, equality and, more specifically, the Voting Rights Act. The United States Constitution is famously silent about local governments. In light of this omission and considering individual constitutional rights, would it make a difference to have local governments in the constitutional text? And to whom would it matter the most? This research developed an original dataset to answer those questions. This article focuses on annexation as proxy for local powers, and it compares the U.S. federalism scheme with the Brazilian unprecedented experience of leveling local governments alongside the states and the federal union in the Constitution of 1988. This research is unique in its comparison of the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court (U.S.S.C.) and its Brazilian counterpart, the Supremo Tribunal Federal (S.T.F.), with regard to annexation laws. The main contributions of this study to the literature are straightforward. First, it advances the literature on constitutional design by focusing on local governments, instead of states and the federal union. Second, and related to such an advancement, this paper departs from traditional federalism comparisons which were restricted to developed countries. Third, this research provides evidence contradicting previous claims that the U.S. constitutional omission of local governments was a failure of constitutional design relating to future matters. In addition, this study analyzes the consequences of the Brazilian constitutional design. This article concludes that there is no evidence supporting the proposition that the inclusion of municipalities as federal actors is necessarily superior to the current comparative trend that uses the dual spheres system of the U.S. federalism as a paradigm. Therefore, this research leads to unexpected results and provides evidence that contradicts the understanding of the U.S. constitutional omission of local governments as a failure of constitutional design.https://bolognalawreview.unibo.it/article/view/7493Constitutional DesignU.S. FederalismAnnexation LawUnited States Supreme CourtLocal GovernmentsComparative LawLaw and DevelopmentVoting Rights ActLegal TransplantsBrazilian Federalism
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Carolina Arlota
spellingShingle Carolina Arlota
Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
University of Bologna Law Review
Constitutional Design
U.S. Federalism
Annexation Law
United States Supreme Court
Local Governments
Comparative Law
Law and Development
Voting Rights Act
Legal Transplants
Brazilian Federalism
author_facet Carolina Arlota
author_sort Carolina Arlota
title Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
title_short Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
title_full Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
title_fullStr Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
title_full_unstemmed Should Local Governments be Included in the Constitution? A Comparative Analysis Between the U.S. and Brazilian Supreme Courts’ Reasoning Regarding Annexation Laws
title_sort should local governments be included in the constitution? a comparative analysis between the u.s. and brazilian supreme courts’ reasoning regarding annexation laws
publisher University of Bologna
series University of Bologna Law Review
issn 2531-6133
publishDate 2017-11-01
description Annexation of local governments is a contentious topic. Litigation of annexation often addresses important constitutional provisions, such as property rights, federalism, limitations to police powers, equality and, more specifically, the Voting Rights Act. The United States Constitution is famously silent about local governments. In light of this omission and considering individual constitutional rights, would it make a difference to have local governments in the constitutional text? And to whom would it matter the most? This research developed an original dataset to answer those questions. This article focuses on annexation as proxy for local powers, and it compares the U.S. federalism scheme with the Brazilian unprecedented experience of leveling local governments alongside the states and the federal union in the Constitution of 1988. This research is unique in its comparison of the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court (U.S.S.C.) and its Brazilian counterpart, the Supremo Tribunal Federal (S.T.F.), with regard to annexation laws. The main contributions of this study to the literature are straightforward. First, it advances the literature on constitutional design by focusing on local governments, instead of states and the federal union. Second, and related to such an advancement, this paper departs from traditional federalism comparisons which were restricted to developed countries. Third, this research provides evidence contradicting previous claims that the U.S. constitutional omission of local governments was a failure of constitutional design relating to future matters. In addition, this study analyzes the consequences of the Brazilian constitutional design. This article concludes that there is no evidence supporting the proposition that the inclusion of municipalities as federal actors is necessarily superior to the current comparative trend that uses the dual spheres system of the U.S. federalism as a paradigm. Therefore, this research leads to unexpected results and provides evidence that contradicts the understanding of the U.S. constitutional omission of local governments as a failure of constitutional design.
topic Constitutional Design
U.S. Federalism
Annexation Law
United States Supreme Court
Local Governments
Comparative Law
Law and Development
Voting Rights Act
Legal Transplants
Brazilian Federalism
url https://bolognalawreview.unibo.it/article/view/7493
work_keys_str_mv AT carolinaarlota shouldlocalgovernmentsbeincludedintheconstitutionacomparativeanalysisbetweentheusandbraziliansupremecourtsreasoningregardingannexationlaws
_version_ 1725762597726191616