Four Matters of Interpretation: The Constitutional Phenomenon in Comparative Studies.

This article takes a close look at the state of comparative constitutional studies as constitutional scholarship is taking a comparative turn. It first surveys the field and identifies four varieties – doctrinal, law-and-society, documentary, and cultural – of constitutional comparison and then crit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Vol. 45; no. 2; pp. 301 - 329
Autor principal: Kuo, Ming-Sung
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Summer2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=186053974&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 186053974
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        01436503
        BJ4
      jtl: Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
      issn: 01436503
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Summer2025
      vid: 45
      iid: 2
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        186053974
        10.1093/ojls/gqaf002
      ppf: 301
      ppct: 28
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 718KB
      tig:
        atl: Four Matters of Interpretation: The Constitutional Phenomenon in Comparative Studies.
      aug:
        au: Kuo, Ming-Sung
      su:
        Constitutional law
        Comparative studies
        Comparative law
        Scientism
        Myth
      sug:
        subj:
          Constitutional law
          Comparative studies
          Comparative law
          Scientism
          Myth
      keyword:
        comparative constitutional law/studies
        comparative turn
        constitutional comparison as interpretation
        constitutional phenomenon
        myth of scientism
        positivist trap
      ab: This article takes a close look at the state of comparative constitutional studies as constitutional scholarship is taking a comparative turn. It first surveys the field and identifies four varieties – doctrinal, law-and-society, documentary, and cultural – of constitutional comparison and then critically investigates the state of comparative constitutional studies. Through this two-stage engagement, this article aims to make two main analytical points. First, at the core of each of the four varieties of comparative constitutional studies lies an interpretive exercise oriented by its distinctive purpose. Second, the social sciences' growing influence on constitutional comparison has entailed a myth of scientism in the field, which may inadvertently impoverish comparative constitutional studies as a whole. It concludes with a cautionary note on the comparative turn in studying constitutional ordering. With its prevalent focus on formal institutions and norms in constitutional orders, the comparative turn may unwittingly limit studies of the multifaceted constitutional phenomenon.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: © 2019 Oxford University Press.
      item: Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
      holder: Oxford University Press / USA
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N