The Comparative Turn: Accident, Coincidence, or Fate?

11 Pages Posted: 5 Jul 2012 Last revised: 6 Jul 2012

Date Written: 2012

Abstract

The comparative turn taken by one of America’s most influential constitutional scholars can tell us much about the field of comparative constitutional law. In this paper, delivered as a Provocation at the Symposium in Honor of Professor Frank Michelman, at Harvard Law School, February 10-11, 2012, three hypothesis are given for this turn. The first hypothesis, accident, looks to the post-Cold war expansion of the field of comparative constitutional law and the upsurge of American constitutional influence at that time. The second hypothesis, coincidence, views Michelman’s seminal work on constitutional economic and social rights, as well as on property, equality, law and economics, and democracy, as singularly apposite for building constitutionalism in post-apartheid South Africa. The third hypothesis, fate, examines how the normative questions that Michelman posed transcended any one constitutional system, precipitating a critical reflection on the United States, South Africa, and other constitutional systems.

Keywords: comparative constitutional law, Frank Michelman, constitutionalism and democracy, economic and social rights, property, equality, South Africa, United States

Suggested Citation

Young, Katharine, The Comparative Turn: Accident, Coincidence, or Fate? (2012). Harvard Law Review Forum, Vol. 125, 2012, ANU College of Law Research Paper No. 12-20, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2100614

Katharine Young (Contact Author)

Boston College - Law School ( email )

885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
63
Abstract Views
827
Rank
627,735
PlumX Metrics