Robert Alexy presents his peculiar theory of principles, especially the instrument of balancing, as a mechanism to combat judicial arbitrariness. This article investigates the powers granted to the judge by Alexy’s balancing operation: power to assign weight to the “importance” of legal goods and rights in balancing; power to discover ‘principles’ to be balanced; power to assign meaning to the normative text in order to form the input of balancing; power to identify the presence in the concrete case of a constitutional right, in order to use balancing even in cases in which the legislator has established a ‘rule’. The conclusion is that Alexy’s balancing is not a legitimate possibility in a Rule of Law, because it makes no claim to control the practically absolute powers granted to judges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fábio Carvalho de Alvarenga Peixoto (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: