Article by Santiago Legarre and Christopher R. Handy
The state of Louisiana and the country of Argentina have, at their base, a civil law legal tradition. Yet, both jurisdictions use a decentralized court system typically associated with the Anglo-American common law tradition. In the context of judicial review, a decentralized court system achieves uniformity in constitutional law through stare decisis in contrast to centralized systems which are more common in European civil law countries. Because Louisiana and Argentina do not formally recognize the doctrine of stare decisis but use a court system designed for that doctrine, it would seem that uniform constitutional law would be difficult in those two jurisdictions. This article explores why this is not the case by comparing the mechanics of judicial review in the United States, Louisiana, and Argentina. Indeed, through several practical effects, influence, and the overall convergence of legal systems, Louisiana and Argentina achieve desirable effects in judicial review with unique avenues for flexibility in certain circumstances.
About the Authors
Santiago Legarre. Professor of Law, Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina and CONICET (Consejo Nacional de Invesigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas, Argentina); Visiting Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School, LSU Law Center, and Strathmore University Law School (Kenya).
Christopher R. Handy. J.D. Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center. Law Clerk to the Honorable W. Eugene Davis, United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Citation
95 Tul. L. Rev. 445 (2021)