Description
Book SynopsisAs the terminal crisis of the Weimar Republic intensified, Hans Kelsen and Carl Schmitt debated whether the Weimar Constitution should be protected by a constitutional court or by presidential dictatorship. This volume provides the first translation of Kelsen's and Schmitt's famous and influential exchange on the 'Guardian of the Constitution'.
Trade Review'The debate between Kelsen and Schmitt is far richer and more timely than the foregoing brief overview can suggest. Vinx has provided a great service in executing a fluent and accessible translation, in writing an illuminating and erudite introduction, and in making the constitutional writings of Kelsen and Schmitt available to a wider audience than was previously the case. And Vinx has provided an additional service in reminding us that many of the important figures in the history of legal theory were also on the front lines of salient legal disputes offering arguments that put their theoretical positions in very concrete contexts.' Frederick Schauer, The New Rambler
Table of ContentsIntroduction; 1. Kelsen on the nature and development of constitutional adjudication; 2. The guardian of the constitution: Schmitt's argument against judicial review; 3. The guardian of the constitution: Schmitt on the President as guardian of the constitution; 4. Who ought to be the guardian of the constitution? Kelsen's reply to Schmitt; 5. Prussia contra Reich: Schmitt's closing statement in Leipzig; 6. Kelsen on the judgment of the Staatsgerichtshof of the 25th of October 1932.
