PROTECTING THE WELFARE AND PROPERTY OF INDIVIDUALS

Protecting the welfare and property of individuals

Abstract

American lawyers traditionally assumed that constitutional judicial review of State regulation of the law and practice as a necessary and sufficient to protect private property rights. Recently, however, a few scholars and economists have begun to question the need and sufficient. Data from the United States and Great Britain shows that political institutions not only regulate or expropriation of private property, but also to protect these rights, even in the absence of constitutional judicial review powers of the courts to cancel or to claim compensation in the event of expropriation. This article proposes that the constitutional judicial review of State regulation should be the subject of social welfare to determine when and if such revision is effective. Proposed a model that has the necessary level of protection of property rights. Judicial review is the value of which net either added or subtracted from, the overall social security. It will be seen that in real terms contained in real cases, the optimal level of judicial review is not necessarily something that provides maximum protection of property rights, and the one where the benefits review clearly outweigh the costs.

Protecting the welfare and property of individuals

Introduction

Protecting the welfare and property of individuals

In "political institutions, judicial control and ownership: a comparative analysis of the institutional," Cole (forthcoming 2007) shows that political institutions are well protected the rights of ownership in the United Kingdom, although courts lacked the power of constitutional judicial review, i.e. authorities repeal acts of Parliament or by the Parliament to pay compensation where it expropriates or regulates private property rights 1 this discovery would come as a surprise to most American lawyers who typically require, often quite by chance that in the absence of vigilant protection in accordance with paragraph Revenue fifth amendment, ownership in land in the United States will soon be dust rampant legislators and regulators. In other words, they assume that constitutional judicial review is strictly necessary, without which the private property rights will not long survive. Already well guarded private property rights, freedoms and economic efficiency are lost.

Analysis

The long history of political protection of private property rights in the UK are categorically against reduction of constitutional judicial review in fact strictly necessary to protect the institution of private property. In addition, recent theories of political economy, and positive evidence that democratic political/legislative institutions, particularly ...