This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by DUCHACEK, I. D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

State Constitutional Law in Comparative Perspective

Can the existence and modifications of state constitutions be viewed as being among the nourishing fountains of federalism? A comparative analysis suggests two caveats. While in the United States and Switzerland both the birth and subsequent modification of state constitutions confirm a two-way traffic in federal practices between federal and state governments, in other systems, though labeled "federations," state constitutions rarely reflect political assertions of regional autonomy from below. Instead, subnational constitutions in such federations may only represent a unitary or dictatorial delegation of some administrative powers to territorial subunits, a delegation that can easily be revoked by the central government. On the other hand, due to a federal political tradition, federal practices may flourish in some unions whose territorial components lack indigenous subnational constitutions, as in Canada and Australia.

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 496, No. 1, 128-139 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0002716288496001013


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?