The Deliberative Case for Constitutional Referenda

Date

Authors

Levy, Ron

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

Abstract

In this article I examine controversies over the use of referenda and plebiscites for constitutional reform. My chief example is a recent development toward plebiscitary democracy in Australia. Although there is no legal requirement in Australia for a popular vote to legalize same-sex marriage, the federal government has considered holding such a vote. Marriage rights provide a key example in which the normative case for direct democratic constitutional reform remains unsettled, and indeed controversial. I rely on deliberative democratic theory to conclude that referenda and plebiscites generally should be part of constitutional reform processes. I nuance this conclusion by outlining categories of legal norms raising distinctive considerations as to whether and when public voting should precede constitutional reform.

Description

Citation

Source

Election Law Journal

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

2099-12-31