BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO
This article analyzes the position adopted by the Federal Supreme Court in Writ of Mandamus n. 32.033, which examined a petition for suspension of a bill and denied it, asserting that judicial intervention in the legislative process is only possible in hypotheses of viola...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | Portuguese |
Published: |
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
2020-09-01
|
Series: | Revista Acadêmica |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://periodicos.ufpe.br/revistas/ACADEMICA/article/view/242025/pdf |
id |
doaj-e32d42a8bc2f44fb81911dea8bb5c398 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-e32d42a8bc2f44fb81911dea8bb5c3982020-11-25T02:44:04ZporUniversidade Federal de PernambucoRevista Acadêmica1980-30872448-23072020-09-0191198117BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVOThales Alessandro Dias Pereira0Universidade de BrasíliaThis article analyzes the position adopted by the Federal Supreme Court in Writ of Mandamus n. 32.033, which examined a petition for suspension of a bill and denied it, asserting that judicial intervention in the legislative process is only possible in hypotheses of violation of the procedural rules or contrariety to limitation clauses by a proposal for constitutional amendment. The theoretical framework of the analysis is discursive proceduralism. By this sight, the constitutional jurisdiction has the primary function of preserving the democratic conditions of legislative process. It is argued that the reasons for the denial of the petition are adequate to a procedural conception of constitutional jurisdiction, inasmuch as they enable the Federal Supreme Court to fulfill its role of guaranteeing the democratic process without incurring in excessive judicializationof political activity.https://periodicos.ufpe.br/revistas/ACADEMICA/article/view/242025/pdfproceduralismconstitutional jurisdictionconstitutionality control |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
Portuguese |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Thales Alessandro Dias Pereira |
spellingShingle |
Thales Alessandro Dias Pereira BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO Revista Acadêmica proceduralism constitutional jurisdiction constitutionality control |
author_facet |
Thales Alessandro Dias Pereira |
author_sort |
Thales Alessandro Dias Pereira |
title |
BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO |
title_short |
BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO |
title_full |
BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO |
title_fullStr |
BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO |
title_full_unstemmed |
BALIZAS DO CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE PREVENTIVO: UMA ANÁLISE DO MANDADO DE SEGURANÇA 32.033 A PARTIR DO PROCEDIMENTALISMO DISCURSIVO |
title_sort |
balizas do controle de constitucionalidade preventivo: uma análise do mandado de segurança 32.033 a partir do procedimentalismo discursivo |
publisher |
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco |
series |
Revista Acadêmica |
issn |
1980-3087 2448-2307 |
publishDate |
2020-09-01 |
description |
This article analyzes the position adopted by the Federal Supreme Court in Writ of Mandamus n. 32.033, which examined a petition for suspension of a bill and denied it, asserting that judicial intervention in the legislative process is only possible in hypotheses of violation of the procedural rules or contrariety to limitation clauses by a proposal for constitutional amendment. The theoretical framework of the analysis is discursive proceduralism. By this sight, the constitutional jurisdiction has the primary function of preserving the democratic conditions of legislative process. It is argued that the reasons for the denial of the petition are adequate to a procedural conception of constitutional jurisdiction, inasmuch as they enable the Federal Supreme Court to fulfill its role of guaranteeing the democratic process without incurring in excessive judicializationof political activity. |
topic |
proceduralism constitutional jurisdiction constitutionality control |
url |
https://periodicos.ufpe.br/revistas/ACADEMICA/article/view/242025/pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT thalesalessandrodiaspereira balizasdocontroledeconstitucionalidadepreventivoumaanalisedomandadodeseguranca32033apartirdoprocedimentalismodiscursivo |
_version_ |
1724767673964822528 |