PDF (Español)
FLIP
Authors
Manuel Atienza
Perfil Google Scholar
Abstract
The judgment handed down by the Plenary of the Spanish Constitutional Court in the appeal of unconstitutionality 2054/2020 (judgment 148/2021, of July 14) has undoubtedly become one of the most commented and discussed in the entire history of the Court. To begin with, the ruling was signed by six of the members of the Court, but there were five other judges (including the president) who disagreed with the majority opinion and formulated individual opinions in terms that in some cases revealed the great tension that seems to have arisen within the body. And a tension that, moreover, did not translate into a strict division between "conservative" and "progressive" judges, as has occurred more frequently in recent times. On this occasion there were at least two of the justices usually described as conservative who departed from the majority opinion; and one of the supposedly progressive justices who reportedly went over to the opposite side.
References
Atienza, M. (2017). Filosofía del Derecho y transformación social. Trotta.
De la Quadra-Salcedo, T. (5 de julio de 2021). La terrible confusión entre limitar y suspender derechos. Agenda Pública. https://agendapublica.elpais.com/noticia/17201/terrible-confusion-entre-limitarsuspender-derechos
Doménech, G. (2021). Dogmatismo contra pragmatismo. Dos maneras de ver las restricciones de derechos fundamentales impuestas con ocasión de la COVID-19. InDret, 4, 345-411. https:// indret.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Final_Domenech-Pascual-2021-Dogmatismo-contrapragmatismo.pdf
García, J. A. (2011). Un debate sobre la ponderación. Palestra.
