Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Judicial Approaches to Political Questions: A Comparative Study of the United States and South Korea Cover

Judicial Approaches to Political Questions: A Comparative Study of the United States and South Korea

By: Doori Song  
Open Access
|Oct 2019

References

  1. BARKOW, Rachel, E. More Supreme than Court? The Fall of the Political Question Doctrine and the Rise of Judicial Supremacy. Columbia Law Review, 2002, vol. 102, pp. 239–241.10.2307/1123824
  2. BICKEL, Alexander, The Least Dangerous Branch. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962, p. 184.
  3. CHEMERINSKY, Erwin, Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies. Fifth Edition. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2015, p. 135.
  4. CHEMERINSKY, Erwin, Interpreting the Constitution. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1987, pp. 99–105.
  5. COHEN, Harlan, Grant. A Politics-Reinforcing Political Question Doctrine. Arizona State Law Journal, 2017, vol. 49, pp. 5–6.
  6. Court of Korea, Organization: Justices. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018. Constitutional Court of Korea [CCK] Aug. 30, 2011, 23-2(A) KCCR 366, 2006Hun-Ma788 (S. Kor.).
  7. Constitutional Court of Korea, About the Court. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  8. Constitutional Court of Korea, History of Constitutional Adjudication. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  9. Constitutional Court of Korea, Jurisdiction: Adjudication on Competence Dispute. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  10. Constitutional Court of Korea, Jurisdiction: Adjudication on Dissolution of a Political Party. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  11. Constitutional Court of Korea, Jurisdiction: Adjudication on Impeachment. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  12. Constitutional Court of Korea, Jurisdiction: Adjudication on the Constitutionality of Statutes. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  13. Constitutional Court of Korea, Jurisdiction: Constitutional Complaint. [online]. Available at: Accessed: 08.12.2018.
  14. DANSBY, Joshua W. Rule of Law in the United States. Stability is One of the World’s Most Valued Commodities. International and Comparative Law Review, 2017, vol. 17, p. 147.10.2478/iclr-2018-0006
  15. DORSEN, Norman et al., Comparative Constitutionalism: Cases and Materials. Third Edition. St. Paul: West Academic Publishing, 2016, pp. 38–39.
  16. FIELD, Oliver, P. The Doctrine of Political Questions in the Federal Courts. Minnesota Law Review, 1924, vol. 8, p. 512.
  17. FREEMAN, Michelle. The Right to Dignity in the United States. Hastings Law Journal, 2017, vol. 68, p. 1137.
  18. HAHM, Chaihark. Beyond “Law v. Politics” in Constitutional Adjudication: Lessons from South Korea. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2012, vol. 10, p. 1.10.1093/icon/mos004
  19. HAHM, Chaihark. To Make “We the People”: Constitutional Founding in Postwar Japan and South Korea. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2010, vol. 8, p. 3.10.1093/icon/mor007
  20. HENKIN, Louis. Is There a “Political Question” Doctrine?. Yale Law Journal, 1976, vol. 85, p. 599.10.2307/795454
  21. LAU, Holning. Introduction to the Symposium Issue: Pluralism in Asia. North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, 2011. vol 36, p. 499.
  22. LAU, Holning. The Language of Westernization in Legal Commentary. American Journal of Comparative Law, 2013, vol. 61, p. 508.10.5131/AJCL.2012.0024
  23. LIM, Jibong. A Comparative Study of the Constitutional Adjudication Systems of the U.S., Germany and Korea. Tulsa Journal of Comparative & International Law, 1999, vol. 6, pp. 142–144.
  24. LIM, Jibong. Korean Constitutional Court Standing at the Crossroads: Focusing on Real Cases and Variational Types of Decisions. Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, 2002, vol. 24, p. 328.
  25. MULHERN, Peter, J. In Defense of the Political Question Doctrine, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1988, vol. 137, p. 97.10.2307/3312167
  26. PARK, Jonghyun. The Judicialization of Politics in Korea. Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal, 2008, vol. 10, pp. 66–67.
  27. REDISH, Martin. Judicial Review and the Political Question. Northwestern University Law Review, 1985, vol. 79, pp. 1045–1046.
  28. SCHARPF, Fritz. Judicial Review and the Political Question Doctrine: A Functional Analysis. Yale Law Journal, 1966, vol. 75, pp. 539–540.10.2307/794865
  29. SCHAUER, Frederick. Easy Cases. Southern California Law Review, 1985, vol. 58, p. 404.
  30. SIMONIS, Mindaugas. The Role of Judicial Ethics in Court Administration: From Setting the Objectives to Practical Implementation. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 2017, vol. 10, pp. 92–93.10.1515/bjlp-2017-0004
  31. SKINNER, Gwynne. Misunderstood, Misconstrued, and Now Clearly Dead: The “Political Question Doctrine” as a Justiciability Doctrine. Journal of Law and Politics, 2014, vol. 29, p. 431.10.2139/ssrn.2315237
  32. The Constitutional Court of Korea: The First Ten Years of the Korean Constitutional Court. Sixteenth Volume. Seoul, 2001.
  33. TOMOSZEK, Maxim. Impeachment in the U.S. Constitution and Practice – Implications for the Czech Constitution, International and Comparative Law Review, 2017, vol. 17, pp. 133–136.10.2478/iclr-2018-0005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2019-0008 | Journal eISSN: 2464-6601 | Journal ISSN: 12138770
Language: English
Page range: 234 - 260
Published on: Oct 7, 2019
Published by: Palacký University Olomouc
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2019 Doori Song, published by Palacký University Olomouc
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.