It would be helpful if students could count on some preliminary knowledge of constitutional law and comparative constitutional law.

The ultimate goal of the course is to let students familiarise with different approaches and methods applied in various jurisdictions by constitutional or supreme justices to tackle highly controversial and dilemmatic issues, to discuss why they find them legally persuasive or not, and to develop their own critical understanding of the concepts and methods used by courts.

This course aims at getting students more acquainted with the current most 

significant issues related to constitutional law in comparative 

perspective especially observing what certain supreme and constitutional courts do around the world such as, to name a few, the U.S Supreme Court, the German Bundesverfassungsgericht, the French Conseil constitutionnel, the Italian Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, it will be focused on the acknowledgement and protection of some fundamental human rights, on the doctrines behind the idea of human rights and the possible juxtaposition between civil and social rights, the principles of dignity and privacy, and the arguments and techniques to which courts refer to underpin their rulings in these matters.

Students are required to read in advance the materials suggested for any given class. This is the list of the materials (articles and judgments):

(A) D.F. Forte, Marbury's Travail: Federalist Politics and William Marbury's Appointment as Justice of Peace, in 45 Catholic Law Review 340 (1995)

(B) D.M. Douglas, The Rhetorical Use of Marbury v. Madison: The Emergence of a Great Case, in 38 Wake Forest Law Review 375 (2003)

(C) Barry Friedman, The History of the Countermajoritarian Difficulty: Part One. The Road to Judicial Supremacy, in 73 New York University Law Review 333 (1998)

(D) Pierce v. Society of Sisters (U.S. Supreme Court)

(E) Meyer v. Nebraska 6) Griswold v. Connecticut

(F) Roe v. Wade

(G) Loving v. Virginia

(H) Bowers v. Hardwick

(I) Lawrence v. Texas

(J) Obergefell v. Hodges

(K) John Ferejohn, Pasquale Pasquino, Constitutional Adjudication: Lessons from Europe, 82 Tex. L. Rev. 1671 (2004)

(L) Lars Vinx, Carl Schmitt and the problem of constitutional guardianship

(M) Sara Lagi, Hans Kelsen and the Austrian Constitutional Court (1918-1929)

(N) Donald P. Kommers, Abortion and Counstitution: United States and West Germany, American Journal of Comparative Law, 1977, vol. 25, pp. 255-85

(O) Donald P. Kommers, The Constitutional Law of Abortion in Germany: Should Americans Pay Attention? (1994), disponibile a https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1445&context=jchlp 12) Dudgeon v. Hodges (European Court of Human Rights)

(P) Norris v. Ireland (ECtHR)

(Q) Modynos v. Cyprus (ECtHR)

(R) Lautsi v. Italy (ECtHR)

(S) Lautsi v. Italy (ECtHR - Grand Chamber)

(T) S.A.S. V. France (ECtHR)

(U) Torreggiani v. Italy (ECtHR)

(V) Ac Buyse, Nomiko Vima, The Pilot Judgment Procedure at the European Court of Human Courts: Possibilities and Challenges (2009)

(W) Lauren Birchfield, Jessica Corsi, Between Starvation and Globalization: Realizing the Right to Food in India

(X) David Landau, Political Institutions and Judicial Role in Comparative Constitutional Law, disponibile a https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1566&context=articles

No further information is needed.

• This course follows the Socratic method, which consists of engaging students in an active discussion by asking questions about material that students have had the opportunity to read in preparation for a given class.

  
  

  The Socratic method induces students to express their own point of view, encourages confrontation between different opinions, gets them used to cross-examination and helps them refine the tools with which to present their arguments. It is, finally, a way to keep attention and involvement high, based on the conviction that one can create a more favourable learning environment overall, including from one's peers.

• The structure of the course and the teaching methods employed allow for constant monitoring of the students' learning and, therefore, continuous evaluation.

  
  

  For attendees, the final examination consists of a paper of a maximum length of 2 500 words (excluding bibliography) on an agreed topic relating to the course content or issues that can be dealt with from the knowledge acquired. The paper will be handed in in advance of the examination call to which the student signs in in order to examine it in advance. In the examination, the paper is presented and discussed.

  
  

  For non-attending students, the examination consists of a written assignment with two or three questions and an oral test to follow.

English