PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Abstract
This article presents an investigation about the matters that rules the inquiries on habeas corpus between the Second Kingdom and the First Republic in Brazil, and proposes a conceptual frame to characterize the constitutional though made by the Tribunal from the analysis of their decisions.
References
Brigham, J. (1996). The constitution of interests – Beyond the politics of rigths. New York: New York University Press.
Brigham, J. “The constitution of the supreme court”, en Gillman, H.; Clayton, C. (ed.). The supreme court in american politics: new institutionalist interpretations. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
Brigham, J. (1987). The cult of the court. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Clayton, C. (1999). “The supreme court and political jurisprudence: new and old institutionalisms”, en Clayton, C.; Gillman, H. Supreme court decision-making: new institutionalist approaches. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Clayton, C. e Gillman, H. (1999). Supreme court decision-making: new institutionalist approaches. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Cruz, S. (1997). Estado e economia em tempos de crise: política industrial e transição política no Brasil dos anos 80. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará; Campinas: Ed. Da Unicamp.
Cushman, B. (1998). Rethinking the new deal court. The structure of a constitutional revolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Delmas-Marty, M. (1989). “Fécondité des lógiques juridiques sous-jacentes”, Raisonner la raison d´Etat – Vers une Europe des droits de l’Homme. Paris: puf.
Delmas-Marty, M. (1994). Pour un droit commun. Paris: Seuil.
Gillman, H. e Clayton, C. (ed.) (1999). The supreme court in american politics: new institutionalist interpretations. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.
Gillman, H. e Clayton, C.(ed.) (1993). The constitution besieged: the rise and demise of löchner era police powers jurisprudence. Durham NC: Duke University Press.
Gillman, H. e Clayton, C. (ed.) (1999). “The court as an idea, not a building (or a game): interpretative institutionalism and the analysis of Supreme Court decision-making”, in Supreme Court decision-making: new institutionalist approaches. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Ginsburg, T. (2002). Judicial Review in New Democracies – Constitutional courts in Asian cases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koerner, A.(2005). Direito e modernização periférica – Por uma análise sócio-política do pensamento jurídico constitucional brasileiro pós-1988. Comunicação apresentada ao XXIX Encontro Anual da anpocs, no Grupo “Dilemas da modernização periférica”. Caxambu (MG).
Koerner, A. (2005). Globalisation économique, réforme de l’Etat et Constitution: pour une analyse politique de la pensée constitutionnelle au Brésil aux années 1990. Comunicação ao Colloque droit et justice par delà les frontières, organizado pelo Comité de recherche de Sociologie du droit, de l’Association internationale de sociologie, le Réseau Européen Droit et Société et le Groupe de Recherches de Sociologie du Droit de l’Association Française de Sociologie. Paris.
Koerner, A. (1999). Habeas corpus, prática judicial e controle social no Brasil (1841-1920). São Paulo: Ed. IBCCRIM.
Maciel, D. e Koerner, A. (2002) “Sentidos da judicialização da política: duas análises”, Lua Nova, 57.
McCann, M. (1999). “How the Supreme Court matters in american politics: new institutionalist perspectives”, en Gillman, H. e Clayton, C. “Introduction”, The Supreme Court in american politics: new institutionalist interpretations. Kansas: Kansas University Press.
McCann, M. (1994). Rights at work: pay equity reform and the politics of legal mobilization (Chicago Series in Law and Society). Chicago: Chicago University Press: Paperback.
Pacheco, C. (2006). O Supremo Tribunal Federal e a reforma do Estado: uma análise das ações diretas de inconstitucionalidade julgadas no primeiro mandato de Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-1998). Tese de doutorado em Ciências Sociais – Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Sociais, Campinas: Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Richards, M. e Kritzer, H. (2002). “Jurisprudential regimes in Supreme Court decision making”. American Political Science Review, 2, vol. 96.
Sallum JR. (1996). Brasílio. Labirintos – Dos generais à nova República. São Paulo: Hucitec.
Sallum JR. (1999). “O Brasil sob Cardoso: neoliberalismo e desenvolvimento”. Tempo social, 2, vol. 11. São Paulo.
Stone Sweet, A. (2002). “Judicialisation and the construction of governance”, in Shapiro, M; Stone Sweet, A. On law, politics, and judicialization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, M. (2004). Activating judges: courts, institutional structure, and the judicialization of policy reform in Brazil, 1988-2002. Ph. Dissertation of Philosophy in Government, Georgetown University Washington, D. C.: mimeo.
Vianna, L. A democracia e os três poderes no Brasil. Belo Horizonte: ufmg, 2002.
Vianna, L. et al. (1999). A judicialização da política e das relações sociais no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Revan.
