Novo texto de Cass Sunstein intitulado “Constitutional Personae, sobre os tipos de juízes e a consequência da adoção de cada postura. Um texto ainda em construção, que lembra um pouco algumas ideias do livro “A Constituttion of Many Minds”. Muito interessante.
“Debates over constitutional law familiarly explore competing theories of interpretation. Should judges follow the original understanding of the Constitution, or attempt to reinforce democratic processes, or offer moral readings? The differences among competing theories are of course fundamental. But if we investigate the arc of constitutional history, we will discover another set of differences. They involve disparate Constitutional Personae – judicial roles and self-presentations that sharply separate judges (as well as academic commentators). The leading Personae are Heroes, Soldiers, Burkeans, and Mutes. Broadly speaking, Heroes are willing to invoke the Constitution to invalidate state and federal legislation; Soldiers defer to the actions of the political branches; Burkeans favor only incremental change; and Mutes prefer not to decide difficult questions.”