A pesquisa aborda os aspectos positivos e as debilidades das teorias da proporcionalidade, analisando o diálogo entre as interpretações doutrinárias constitucionalista e penalista quanto ao tema. Tendo como base um contexto social marcado pelo recrudescimento do poder punitivo, por distorções na tensão liberdade-segurança e pela abertura do sistema jurídico a influxos de seu entorno, o trabalho busca identificar o papel da proporcionalidade em sentido amplo na estabilização normativa envolvendo as relações jurídicas conflituosas em direito penal. Tendo como hipótese de investigação a ideia de que a proporcionalidade é utilizada frequentemente como artifício retórico nominalista, servindo nas argumentações jurídicas tanto à limitação quanto à justificação das intervenções punitivas, a pesquisa se dedica a testar tal afirmação preliminar por meio de dois estágios de análise: (i) primeiramente, é desenvolvido um arcabouço teórico que possibilita que discute o conteúdo dogmático das regras de proporcionalidade e sua funcionalidade na interpretação penal, buscando com isso viabilizar a (ii) verificação empírica e crítica do sentido normativo atribuído pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal à proporcionalidade no direito penal nos anos de 2011 e 2012. / The research addresses the strengths and weaknesses of the proportionality theories through a dialogue between constitutional and criminal legal studies. The investigation aims at identifying the proportionality role in the stabilization of normative standards related to conflicting relations concerning criminal law, within the context of the increasing of the punitive power, of distortions regarding the tension between liberty-security and of the legal systems opening to the expansive flows deriving from laws environment. The research hypothesis is that proportionality is frequently used within legal discussions as a nominalist and rhetorical resource, contributing to both the limitation and the justification of state penal measures. Therefore, the investigation tests such fundamental preliminary statement through two analytical stages: (i) first, the research develops a theoretical framework, which allows the discussion of the dogmatic contents of the proportionality rules and its functionality concerning criminal law interpretation. As a result of the first stage, the research performs (ii) an empirical verification and critical evaluation of the normative sense assigned by the Brazils Supreme Court to the proportionality within criminal law cases among 2011 and 2012.

Após a promulgação da Constituição de 1988, o Supremo Tribunal Federal passou a integrar a vida cotidiana da população, por meio das diversas informações sobre seus julgamentos, os quais envolvem, cada vez mais, questões políticas, com impacto sobre a vida dos cidadãos. Essa atuação da Corte tem despertado algumas críticas, relacionadas principalmente à sua legitimidade democrática para decidir sobre assuntos políticos e a uma suposta violação do princípio da separação de Poderes. Esse debate está inserido no contexto mais amplo de protagonismo do Poder Judiciário brasileiro no século XXI, expressado principalmente pela expansão da jurisdição constitucional, o que, por sua vez, se deve à consolidação do sistema de controle de constitucionalidade e a uma nova interpretação constitucional. Com efeito, a Constituição de 1988 expandiu as competências do Supremo, incitando o exercício de sua função política. As críticas feitas à Corte em razão de sua atuação com relação a questões políticas estão relacionadas a dois fenômenos, a judicialização da política e o ativismo judicial, sendo este considerado por parte da doutrina como uma indevida interferência do Poder Judiciário no âmbito de atuação dos Poderes Legislativo e Executivo. Casos como o reconhecimento da união estável homoafetiva foram considerados expressão desse ativismo. No entanto, é possível abordar o assunto da legitimidade democrática da Corte e da separação de Poderes de forma diferente, mais flexível. As teorias do diálogo, nessa medida, apresentam uma nova proposta de interação entre o Supremo Tribunal Federal e o Poder Legislativo, conferindo compreensão mais atual da democracia e da separação de Poderes. Isso porque prescinde da opção de predomínio do Legislativo ou do Judiciário em dar a última palavra sobre a constitucionalidade de leis e atos normativos. Desse modo, este trabalho visa a demonstrar, que há de se procurar saídas à rígida estrutura da Teoria da Separação de Poderes de Montesquieu, a fim de que a Constituição possa ser concretizada mediante uma efetiva colaboração dos Poderes. / After the promulgation of the Constitution of 1988, Brazilian Supreme Court became part of everyday life of the population due to the various information about its trials, which involve, increasingly, political issues that impact the life of Brazilian population. Such performance of the Court has aroused some criticism, mainly related to its democratic legitimacy to decide on political affairs and to the violation of the principle of the separation of Powers. This debate is embedded in the broader context of the Brazilian Judiciary protagonism in the XXI Century, specially expressed by the expansion of constitutional jurisdiction, which is due to the consolidation of the judicial review system and a \"new\" constitutional interpretation. Indeed, Constitution of 1988 expanded the powers of the Supreme Court, urging the exercise of its political function. The criticisms addressed to the Court by reason of its performance with respect to policy issues are related to two phenomena: the \"judicialization of politics\" and \"judicial activism\", which are considered by the doctrine as an undue interference by the Judiciary on the performance of the Legislative and Executive branches. Cases such as the recognition of homo-affective union were considered stable expression of activism. However, it is possible to approach more flexibly the issue of democratic legitimacy of the Court and of the separation of powers more flexibly. Theories of dialogue present a new proposal for interaction between the Supreme Court and the legislature, giving more current understanding of democracy and separation of powers. It reveals an alternative to waive predominance of the Legislature or the Judiciary to give the \"last decision\" on the constitutionality of laws and normative acts. Thus, this study aims to demonstrate, there to seek outlets to the rigid structure of Montesquieus Separation of Powers, so that the Constitution can be achieved through effective collaboration of Powers.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-09-30T12:33:55Z No. of bitstreams: 1 wagnersilveirarezende.pdf: 915185 bytes, checksum: 3e0dbc70edca4275b7077067c5d32b8c (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Diamantino Mayra (mayra.diamantino@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-09-30T13:38:21Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 wagnersilveirarezende.pdf: 915185 bytes, checksum: 3e0dbc70edca4275b7077067c5d32b8c (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-09-30T13:38:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 wagnersilveirarezende.pdf: 915185 bytes, checksum: 3e0dbc70edca4275b7077067c5d32b8c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-02-11 / O presente trabalho tem como objetivo resgatar um conceito de retórica que avalie a mesma de uma forma positiva, dotando-a de dignidade e importância próprias. Para isso, é necessário apontar quais foram as críticas mais agudas sofridas pela retórica no desenvolvimento do pensamento ocidental, compreendendo como ela se tornou uma espécie de saber sujeitado e excluído das formas legítimas de produção do conhecimento. Em seguida, procede-se à demonstração da importância que a retórica passou a ter a partir de fins do século XIX, e durante o século XX, em vários contextos específicos, como o político, o filosófico e o jurídico. Para tanto, foram analisados os votos dos Ministros do Supremo Tribunal Federal brasileiro, no caso da ADI 3510, que envolvia o pedido de inconstitucionalidade da lei de Biossegurança, que trata das pesquisas com células-tronco embrionárias no país. Tal análise permite entender como a retórica foi fundamental para o estabelecimento de uma decisão em um caso de tamanha importância para a ciência, para a política e para o direito. / This paper aims to recover a concept of rhetoric to understand it in a positive way, giving it dignity and importance. To reach this aim, it is necessary to point out what were the strongest criticisms suffered by the rhetoric in the development of Western thought, including how it became a kind of knowing excluded from the legitimate forms of knowledge production. Then this paper demonstrates the importance that the rhetoric acquired from the late nineteenth century, and during the twentieth century, in various contexts, such as political, philosophical and legal. For this, we analyzed the votes of the Ministers of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the case of ADI 3510, which involved the claim of unconstitutionality of the law on Biosafety, which regulates the research with embryonic stem cells in the country. This analysis allows us to understand how the rhetoric has been fundamental in the establishment of a decision in a case of such importance to the science, to the politics and to the law.

The Little Sisters of the Poor v. Burwell, a 2016 landmark religious liberty case, illustrates the ongoing debate between religious non-profit organizations and the government regarding the contraception mandate of the Affordable Care Act. Although the Little Sisters, in part because of their public relations and political advantages, received a relatively favorable outcome at the Supreme Court, their true successes lie on their impact on conservative politics and on the 2016 election. The Little Sisters became a significant component of political and religious leaders’ strategy to reframe the issue.

These days, the Supreme Court of the United States represents a very important and irreplaceable role in its home land: protection of constitutionality, explanation of federal laws, as well as appellate court of last resort within the framework of American courts. Today there is no doubt about its jurisdiction, but there were doubts. In the beginning of its existence no one was sure if the Court could overcome the initial obstacles which were in the way. This diploma thesis deals with the initial existence of the Supreme Court of the United States, its role within the framework of the US federal power system, and its progressive integration as equal with the legislative branch and executive power - The United States Congress and the President, respectively. The main objective of this thesis is to introduce the federal judiciary of the United States, show its differences from the continental system, and accentuate the importance of precedents. First, I focus on the history of the United States; colonization by British citizens, the American War for Independence, The Declaration of Independence, and the formation of American statehood in the 1780s, which resulted in the acceptance of one of the longest- lasting written constitutions in the world. After the historical excurse, the thesis focuses on...

La thèse propose une théorie du discours de l’avocat devant la Cour de cassation. Plus précisément, c’est une partie du contenu de ce discours, les moyens de cassation, qui sont au cœur de l’analyse. Trop souvent, l’attention des théoriciens du droit se porte sur les discours qui sont traditionnellement perçus comme normatifs, à savoir le discours législatif et le discours jurisprudentiel. Assimilé au discours doctrinal parce qu’il n’est ni scientifique, ni à l’origine d’une norme, le discours de l’avocat demeure quant à lui dans une catégorie (les discours de « politique juridique » selon Kelsen, et les discours de « dogmatique juridique » selon Michel Troper) vouée à l’indifférence. Pourtant, ce n’est parce que les interprétations des avocats sont des actes guidés par la seule volonté de leurs auteurs qu’elles ne gagnent pas à faire l’objet d’une étude scientifique. Certains discours universitaires, également prescriptifs, font l’objet d’analyse visant à montrer leur incidence sur l’évolution de la jurisprudence alors même que d’un point de vue ontologique, le discours de l’avocat est mieux doté pour agir sur l’œuvre jurisprudentielle, notamment lorsqu’il est, comme celui de l’avocat aux Conseils, immédiatement et systématiquement destiné aux juridictions suprêmes. Cette spécificité du discours étudié, dégagée à travers l’étude de sa nature, nous permettra d’en étudier la portée. De ce point de vue, notre thèse, qui doit s’entendre comme une contribution à la théorie réaliste de l’interprétation et à son complément, la théorie des contraintes juridiques, propose une explication de la cohérence jurisprudentielle. Si la Cour de cassation, alors même qu’elle est libre d’interpréter les énoncés législatifs comme elle le souhaite (proposition centrale de la TRI), se montre généralement cohérente par rapport à sa jurisprudence antérieure, c’est parce qu’un ensemble de contraintes spécifiquement juridiques la conduisent à être cohérente (proposition centrale de la TCJ). Or, ces contraintes sont principalement produites ou relayées par les moyens de cassation (notre proposition). Sauf à relever un moyen d’office, procéder à une substitution de motifs ou énoncer un obiter dictum, techniques qui seront exceptionnellement utilisées par cet homo juridicus, la Cour de cassation est généralement contrainte d’effectuer un choix binaire, prédéterminé par le moyen de cassation : réaffirmer l’interprétation des juges du fond (arrêt de rejet) ou retenir celle de l’avocat du demandeur (arrêt de cassation). Autrement dit, le moyen de cassation définit le cadre de l’interprétation authentique, cadre qui favorise la circulation de la jurisprudence antérieure, et qui contraint la Cour de cassation à agir de façon prévisible. / In France, legal realism is currently represented by Michel Troper who is supporting the fact that the law resides in its interpretations by the Supreme Court. Supreme Court interpret legal text with complete freedom because those text do not contain any significations that necessarily need to be apply. This freedom regarding legal text does not exclude the existence of specific legal constraints which determine the supreme Court decisions. Even tough the lawyer’s discourse addressed to supreme jurisdictions does not look like any other legal discourses, it has never been apprehended as a source of constraint limiting sovereign courts freedom. This is what about I will discuss on my thesis.

For centuries, the theory and principles of diplomatics have played a role in the work of European archivists. In North America, however, its relevance is still under scrutiny. This thesis employs diplomatic analysis to test its validity when applied to modern documents and procedures. To investigate the significance of diplomatic methodology and analysis, this thesis first discusses the recent history and structure of the British Columbia court system. It then examines a selection of case files from the civil, probate and bankruptcy registries, and it assigns the documents within to one of the six phases of a procedure: initiative, inquiry, consultation, deliberation, deliberation control, and execution. The study concludes by discussing the diplomatic character of the procedures and its importance in the understanding of modern records. More specifically, it outlines how diplomatics and procedural analysis can assist records professionals in the development of classification systems and retention and disposition schedules; the design of automated records management systems; and archival appraisal, arrangement and description. / Arts, Faculty of / Library, Archival and Information Studies (SLAIS), School of / Graduate

Prostitution, sex in exchange for consideration, has never been illegal in Canada; however, activities surrounding prostitution have been criminalized in the Criminal Code. These prohibited activities include: working indoors (s. 210 keeping a common bawdy house), providing services to sex workers (s. 212(1)(j) living off of the avails of prostitution), and communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution (s. 213). In 2007 two former and one current sex worker, Terri Jean Bedford, Valerie Scott and Amy Lebovitch challenged the constitutionality of the above laws, arguing that they increased sex workers’ vulnerability to harm. Six years later on June 13th, 2013 the Supreme Court of Canada heard the landmark case Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford. Prior to hearing the case, the Supreme Court Justices read the submitted factums outlining the arguments of the appellants, respondents, and their interveners. The final decision was released on December 22nd, 2013 and the unanimous decision to strike down all three laws was made. Using a discourse analysis inspired by Michel Foucault, this study ‘unpacks’ the meanings that are constituted within the factums submitted to the Supreme Court regarding the people who engage in sex work and the institution of prostitution. The convergences and divergences within the discourses are presented. Drawing on these findings, while applying the work of Wedeking’s (2010) strategic legal framing alongside the governmentality perspective of risk, the tensions surrounding risk and choice are further explored. In doing so, the relationship between risk (taking/avoiding) and choice (making) is teased out. In this thesis I argue that risk and choice are strategically framed in the submitted factums to demonstrate the (un)constitutionality of Canada’s prostitution laws. Furthermore, I argue that both the appellants and respondents agree that risk avoidance is an acceptable self-governance strategy for sex workers, however they diverge on what they consider to be acceptable risk avoidance measures. The conclusion of this study discusses the decision of Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford to strike down the three prostitution laws and the subsequent introduction of the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act.

Executive orders are a significant source of presidential power although scholars disagree on the nature of that power. It has been argued that executive orders are an indication of a president's failure to persuade others to act as he desires; others contend that executive orders offer "power without persuasion." This dissertation introduces the conditional model of executive order issuance and duration in order to offer a synthesis to these competing views, and to offer a better understanding of the opportunities and constraints faced by the president when choosing to act unilaterally through executive orders. The conditional theory holds that both the issuance and duration of executive orders is a function of the president's ideological proximity to Congress and the Supreme Court, and the availability of fresh policy space.

The question of whether increased funding pursuant to equity and adequacy court decisions has improved academic performance of at-risk students has sparked a lively and spirited debate. The landmark New Jersey case of Abbott v. Burke has been at the center of this debate. In Abbott, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that students in twenty-eight (28) “special needs” districts must receive the same funding per pupil as students in the two highest socio-economic district factor groups in the State. 149 N.J. 145 (1997) (Abbott IV). The question of whether the redistribution of State aid pursuant to Abbott IV has been efficiently and effectively managed has dominated public policy debates on education in New Jersey for the last two decades. The research questions are: 1. Did the court orders in Abbott v. Burke and subsequent reform policies adopted by the state in response to these orders increase funding and resources for economically disadvantaged students in the Abbott districts? 2. Have increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reached students in the classroom through enhanced instruction and student support services? 3. Have Abbott v. Burke and ensuing State reform policies improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged students as compared to analogous low socioeconomic and working-class students in districts that are not covered by the court decision? 4. Have a specific set of programs and reforms, including intensive early literacy programs in the elementary grades mandated by the State pursuant to Abbott v. Burke been effective for at-risk students in Abbott districts? My study proceeds from descriptive analyses of revenues by source and expenditures per pupil by function to quasi-experimental models. My primary causal analyses involved applying a difference-in-differences (DD) approach using expenditures per pupil, student teacher ratio, state standardized assessment scores for fourth, eighth, and eleventh grade; SAT Verbal and Math district averages; and Graduating with the Class as outcomes. My secondary causal analyses entailed a comparative interrupted time series (CITS) approach using state standardized assessment scores for eleventh grades, SAT scores, graduation rates, and post high plans as outcomes. After an exhaustive study, wherein I built one of the most comprehensive district-level databases in the nation and utilized over twenty-five measures, I find that Abbott v. Burke as an intervention has strong positive effects on education spending, student performance (in the early stages), and the learning environment. Abbott v. Burke had a strong positive effect on education spending from the time the seminal case was decided in 1997 up until to the present date. The fact that Abbott districts are expending more on student support services per pupil in FY 17 than all other socio-economic districts across the State in raw dollars ($2,477) and on a percentage basis (12.7 percent) indicates that increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reach students through enhanced student support services. In New Jersey, increased funding and reform policies pursuant to the line of Abbott v. Burke court decisions has improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged student in the Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic and working-class non-Abbott districts. The DD model suggests that Abbott IV increased the proficiency levels on fourth grade reading assessments of Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 (p<0.01). The DD model suggests that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “high and medium implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. In a confirmation that the IEL program is effective, the DD model also implies that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “low implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. Abbott IV increased the number of students in Abbott districts enrolling in two-year colleges as compared to low socioeconomic or working class districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 means that Abbott students are more cognizant of the opportunities to attend college.