This volume brings together an international group of legal scholars to discuss different approaches to lawmaking. As well as reflecting the diversity of legisprudence as a re-emerging academic field, it offers a broad overview of current developments and challenges in the theory of legislation, and aspires, moreover, to counterbalance some questionable ideas or misconceptions, widespread among jurists, on what making laws entails. The book is organized into three parts. The first comprises a sample of ‘ways and models of legislation’, ranging from classic legislative ideals to contemporary forms of regulation. The essays in this part, variances of focus notwithstanding, revolve around the notions of legislative rationality, quality, effectiveness, and legitimacy, which may be regarded as the cornerstones of legisprudence. Interwoven with these notions is another core legisprudential concern: the justification of laws. We address it separately in the next part by exploring the connection between lawmaking, argumentation and constitutional democracy: under the heading ‘legislation in a culture of justification’, a number of aspects of this connection are tackled that have not been sufficiently considered so far in legisprudential literature, such as the intricacies of legislative reasoning and balancing, or the justificatory problems posed by special-interest legislation. The under privileged status of legisprudence in legal studies and the need for socially attentive and citizen-oriented legislative research come to the fore in the third part of the book which turns to the relationships between ‘legisprudence, lawyers, and citizens’. All in all, the thirteen articles gathered here provide a stimulating insight into the theory of legislation, and can hopefully contribute to the reconciliation of the study of law and the study of its making.

This book seeks to explore the potential and actual value of parliamentary debates as a source of legislative justification. Drawing on a sample of recent Spanish legislation, the papers collected here analyse (critically) the rationale of several laws or legislative measures as it can be reconstructed from the respective parliamentary discussions. All issues covered have given rise to intense political, legal and social controversy: they range from the combat against gender violence, the legal status of bullfighting, the protection of crime victims and the so-called ‘push-backs’ at the border, to the regulation of euthanasia, the minimum living income, underage girls’ access to abortion, and joint child custody. The volume is organised into two main parts. The first group of case studies adopt a legisprudential perspective and examine parliamentary deliberations in the light of the theory and methodology of legislative justification; the contributions in the second part followapproaches that fall outside – but are largely compatible with –legisprudence, and deal with aspects such as the rhetorical strategies employed by MPs when debating bills, and the role of elected legislators as constitutional interpreters.

The essays collected in this book address legislation from the viewpoint of legal theory and provide an overview of current research in legisprudence as a new scholarly approach to lawmaking. The overall focus of the volume is on the justification of legislation, with a special emphasis on the intricate notion of legislative rationality. With the rational justification of legislation as their central theme, the essays elaborate on the foundations and bounds of legislation and the search for a more principled lawmaking, discuss the role of legislation within the framework of democratic constitutionalism, analyze legislation as implementation of constitutional law, and explore how legislative argumentation in parliament can be construed as a source of justification of laws.​  

This book explores the constitutional, legally binding dimension to legisprudence in the light of the German Federal Constitutional Court´s approach to rational lawmaking. Over the last decades this court has been remarkably active in applying legisprudential criteria and standards when reviewing parliamentary laws. It has thus supplied observers with a unique material to analyse the lawmakers’ duty to legislate rationally, and to assess the virtues and drawbacks of this strand of judicial control in a constitutional democracy. By bringing together legislation experts and public law scholars to elaborate on ‘legisprudence under review’, this contributed volume aspires to shed light on the constitutionalisation of rational lawmaking as a controversial trend gaining ground in both national and international jurisdictions. The book is divided into five parts. Part I frames the two key issues pervading the whole collection: the intricate relationship between judicial review and democracy, on the one hand, and the possibility of improving and rationalizing the task of legislation under the current circumstances of politics, on the other. Part II provides an overview of the judicial review of rational lawmaking, laying special emphasis on the duty of legislative justification imposed on lawmakers by the German Constitutional Court. Part III is devoted to the review of the systemic rationality of legislation, in particular to the requirements of legislative consistence and coherence as developed by this court. Contributions in Part IV revolve around the judicial scrutiny of the socio-empirical elements of rational lawmaking, with the control of legislative facts and impacts and the problem of symbolic laws being the central topics. Finally, Part V draws on the German case law to discuss the links between rational lawmaking, balancing and proportionality, and the interdependence between process review and substantive review of legislation.

This volume brings together an international group of legal scholars to discuss different approaches to lawmaking. As well as reflecting the diversity of legisprudence as a re-emerging academic field, it offers a broad overview of current developments and challenges in the theory of legislation, and aspires, moreover, to counterbalance some questionable ideas or misconceptions, widespread among jurists, on what making laws entails. The book is organized into three parts. The first comprises a sample of ‘ways and models of legislation’, ranging from classic legislative ideals to contemporary forms of regulation. The essays in this part, variances of focus notwithstanding, revolve around the notions of legislative rationality, quality, effectiveness, and legitimacy, which may be regarded as the cornerstones of legisprudence. Interwoven with these notions is another core legisprudential concern: the justification of laws. We address it separately in the next part by exploring the connection between lawmaking, argumentation and constitutional democracy: under the heading ‘legislation in a culture of justification’, a number of aspects of this connection are tackled that have not been sufficiently considered so far in legisprudential literature, such as the intricacies of legislative reasoning and balancing, or the justificatory problems posed by special-interest legislation. The under privileged status of legisprudence in legal studies and the need for socially attentive and citizen-oriented legislative research come to the fore in the third part of the book which turns to the relationships between ‘legisprudence, lawyers, and citizens’. All in all, the thirteen articles gathered here provide a stimulating insight into the theory of legislation, and can hopefully contribute to the reconciliation of the study of law and the study of its making.

This book seeks to explore the potential and actual value of parliamentary debates as a source of legislative justification. Drawing on a sample of recent Spanish legislation, the papers collected here analyse (critically) the rationale of several laws or legislative measures as it can be reconstructed from the respective parliamentary discussions. All issues covered have given rise to intense political, legal and social controversy: they range from the combat against gender violence, the legal status of bullfighting, the protection of crime victims and the so-called ‘push-backs’ at the border, to the regulation of euthanasia, the minimum living income, underage girls’ access to abortion, and joint child custody. The volume is organised into two main parts. The first group of case studies adopt a legisprudential perspective and examine parliamentary deliberations in the light of the theory and methodology of legislative justification; the contributions in the second part followapproaches that fall outside – but are largely compatible with –legisprudence, and deal with aspects such as the rhetorical strategies employed by MPs when debating bills, and the role of elected legislators as constitutional interpreters.

The essays collected in this book address legislation from the viewpoint of legal theory and provide an overview of current research in legisprudence as a new scholarly approach to lawmaking. The overall focus of the volume is on the justification of legislation, with a special emphasis on the intricate notion of legislative rationality. With the rational justification of legislation as their central theme, the essays elaborate on the foundations and bounds of legislation and the search for a more principled lawmaking, discuss the role of legislation within the framework of democratic constitutionalism, analyze legislation as implementation of constitutional law, and explore how legislative argumentation in parliament can be construed as a source of justification of laws.​  

This book explores the constitutional, legally binding dimension to legisprudence in the light of the German Federal Constitutional Court´s approach to rational lawmaking. Over the last decades this court has been remarkably active in applying legisprudential criteria and standards when reviewing parliamentary laws. It has thus supplied observers with a unique material to analyse the lawmakers’ duty to legislate rationally, and to assess the virtues and drawbacks of this strand of judicial control in a constitutional democracy. By bringing together legislation experts and public law scholars to elaborate on ‘legisprudence under review’, this contributed volume aspires to shed light on the constitutionalisation of rational lawmaking as a controversial trend gaining ground in both national and international jurisdictions. The book is divided into five parts. Part I frames the two key issues pervading the whole collection: the intricate relationship between judicial review and democracy, on the one hand, and the possibility of improving and rationalizing the task of legislation under the current circumstances of politics, on the other. Part II provides an overview of the judicial review of rational lawmaking, laying special emphasis on the duty of legislative justification imposed on lawmakers by the German Constitutional Court. Part III is devoted to the review of the systemic rationality of legislation, in particular to the requirements of legislative consistence and coherence as developed by this court. Contributions in Part IV revolve around the judicial scrutiny of the socio-empirical elements of rational lawmaking, with the control of legislative facts and impacts and the problem of symbolic laws being the central topics. Finally, Part V draws on the German case law to discuss the links between rational lawmaking, balancing and proportionality, and the interdependence between process review and substantive review of legislation.