Hermenêutica institucional, supremacia judicial e democracia

Abstract

The present thesis intends to study two models of judicial function perfectionism and judicial minimalism delineated by Cass Sunstein, emphasizing their philosophical foundations, their main hermeneutical theories, their decisional limitations and contributions for the institutional design of the relations among the Powers of State. The work in question will develop, in this sense, two fundamental perspectives, that are complementary for the study of the relationships between constitutionalism and democracy in the contemporary political-juridical systems: in first place, an hermeneutical perspective, whose concern resides, above all, in the systemization of the main theories of each one of the two models concerning the interpretation of the constitutional text. In second place, an institutionalist approach will be attempted on the possible alternatives to the protagonism of the Federal Supreme Court in terms of its performance as "last instance" in the definition of the meaning of the constitutional devices. Therefore, proposals of "institutional dialogue" will be analyzed, with support in a comparative study, that can be fomented from a minimalist point of view of judicial moderation that contrasts with the hegemonic defense of an "activist" institutional performance of the constitutional courts at the present time. Lastly, with support in the delineated models of judicial function, a critical analysis of the jurisdictional activity of the ministers of the Federal Supreme Court will be elaborated based in the exam of the argument undertaken in their votes in constitutional hard cases of great political, moral and social repercussion.