BCL Law Notes > Oxford BCL Law Notes > Constitutional Theory Notes

Entrenchment Notes

This is a sample of our (approximately) 8 page long Entrenchment notes, which we sell as part of the Constitutional Theory Notes collection, a 71 package written at Oxford in 2016 that contains (approximately) 192 pages of notes across 12 different documents.

Learn more about our Constitutional Theory Notes

The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.

Entrenchment Revision

The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Constitutional Theory Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.

ENTRENCHMENT Should institutions be allowed to entrench rules against themselves?
 Legislature enacts rules but can also enact rules about how particular rules can be changed - fulfilment of voting or other conditions for repeal or variation o Self-imposed entrenchment - institution limiting its own capacity
 Forms o Supermajority requirements o Certain consultative processes o Specific acknowledgement of previous policy considerations
 Eg o Senate Filibuster rule - greater majority required for repeal of certain rules
 Levels of entrenchment o Make it harder to change o Constitutional rules made unchangeable within a constitution - need to start again entirely: eg final article of German Fundamental Law; "We the People" in Indian Constitution o Procedural constraint of declaration of compatibility with HRA o Indian Supreme Court - declaration that Parliament not permitted to entrench, due to separate entrenched requirement in Constitution M McCubbins and D Rodriguez, 'Superstatutory Entrenchment: A Positive and Normative Interrogatory' 120 Yale Law Journal Online Entrenchment as
 Sociopolitical fact - manner & form of legislation entrenches it
 Part of dynamic political process - subject matter & political nature of legislation makes democratically and politically more difficult to alter - eg Health Care in US o Surely this is a political analysis & not susceptible to analogy with formal entrenchment
 Normative value - nature of certain statutes requires Courts and other institutions to adhere more closely to them - eg social welfare o Overlap between normative questions and formal questions in entrenchment is undesirable N. Barber, 'Why Entrench?' (draft) Entrenchment most justifiable where connection between reason for entrenchment &
manner of entrenchment & area of law entrenched Taxonomy of entrenchment
 Definitions o Broad - Political entrenchment - entrenchment at its broadest - politically difficult to alter, eg NHS o Narrow - strict legal entrenchment - only self-imposed restrictions - eg Canadian Bill of Rights but not manner & form restrictions on Northern Ireland Parliament (imposed by Westminster); or restrictions

of written constitutions passed before or when legislature came into existence o Intermediate - legal entrenchment Body the subject of entrenchment o Generally the legislature o But also the Courts - eg
 High Court's various criteria for revisiting established precedents (self-imposed);
 supermajority requirements (imposed by other body) when striking down legislation (5 US States)
 argument that Chevron doctrine should take form of voting rule rather than doctrinal deference Form of legal entrenchment o Formal entrenchment
 Requirement of express repeal - UK Constitutional laws (Controversially)
 Common law rights & freedoms
 South Africa's equality & discrimination legislation
 Requirement for express form of words - eg acknowledgement that law contrary to Human Rights in Canada Bill of Rights o Time requirements
 Slowing deliberative process - requirement for consultation or delay between readings - mandates proper deliberation
 Requirement for election between proposal & decision - engages electorate
 Spanish Constitution - 'total revision' of Constitution requires supermajority on both sides of election AND referendum (separate process for simple constitutional amendment) o Voting units
 Internal expansion - supermajority requirements -
 eg Spain - 3/5 majority in each chamber for simple amendment (or 2/3 majority in Congress and absolute majority in senate)
 US Filibuster supermajority requirement - allows large minority to repress any law
 Majority of certain groups within the house - eg Northern Ireland - unionist & separatist majorities on certain issues
 External expansion - requiring vote of another body
 Referendum - eg Aus constitutional amendment but also Flags Act
 Involvement of provinces/States - Canada Manner of legal entrenchment o Imposed by other body

****************************End Of Sample*****************************

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Constitutional Theory Notes.