Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory
- The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Frontispiece
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- 1Introduction
- Part IValues
- Part IIModalities
- 10Impartiality
- 11Constitutional Legitimacy
- 12Sovereignty
- 13Constituent Power
- 14Representation
- 15Deliberation
- 16Opposition
- 17The Separation of Powers
- 18The Rule of Law
- 19Constitutional Conventions
- 20Secularism
- 21Constitutional Review
- 22Constitutional Interpretation
- 23Proportionality
- 24Civil Disobedience
- 25Constitutional Entrenchment
- 26Emergency Powers
- 27Regulation
- 28Cost–Benefit Analysis
- 29Revolution
- Part IIIInstitutions
- Part IVChallenges for Constitutional Democracy
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
23 - Proportionality
from Part II - Modalities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 March 2025
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory
- The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Contributors
- Frontispiece
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- 1Introduction
- Part IValues
- Part IIModalities
- 10Impartiality
- 11Constitutional Legitimacy
- 12Sovereignty
- 13Constituent Power
- 14Representation
- 15Deliberation
- 16Opposition
- 17The Separation of Powers
- 18The Rule of Law
- 19Constitutional Conventions
- 20Secularism
- 21Constitutional Review
- 22Constitutional Interpretation
- 23Proportionality
- 24Civil Disobedience
- 25Constitutional Entrenchment
- 26Emergency Powers
- 27Regulation
- 28Cost–Benefit Analysis
- 29Revolution
- Part IIIInstitutions
- Part IVChallenges for Constitutional Democracy
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
Constitutions set out fundamental principles of political morality that bind institutional action and assign strong political rights to individuals. At surface level, the principle of proportionality is a methodological device. It operates as a doctrinal heading under which courts scrutinize state interference with individual liberty and assess the scope of their own authority. According to the orthodox understanding of proportionality, this scrutiny takes the form of balancing rights against public interest, which raises questions about the legitimacy of judicial review. This chapter argues that, contrary to the orthodox view, proportionality is primarily about the normative foundations of constitutional rights and the duty of courts to pursue, through principled legal reasoning, the moral truth about individual rights. On this rival account of proportionality, rights are equality-based moral norms constraining state action and no actual balancing takes place by courts. If we are to take seriously both the idea of fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality, we must abandon the misleading metaphor of balancing and the problems of incommensurability and judicial scepticism to which it leads.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory , pp. 378 - 396Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Recommended Reading
Dworkin, R. (1981). Is there a Right to Pornography? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 1(2), 177–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huscroft, G., Miller, B. W., & Webber, G. eds., (2014). Proportionality and the Rule of Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, V. & Tushnet, M. (2017). Proportionality: New Frontiers, New Challenges, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klatt, M. & Meister, M., (2012). The Constitutional Structure of Proportionality, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumm, M. (2010). The Idea of Socratic Contestation and the Right to Justification: The Point of Rights-Based Proportionality Review. Law and Ethics of Human Rights, 4(2), 142–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letsas, G. (2015). Rescuing Proportionality. In Cruft, R., Liao, S., Renzo, M., eds., Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Letsas, G. (2018). Proportionality as Fittingness. Current Legal Problems, 71(1), 53–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lever, A. (2020). A Sense of Proportion: Some Thoughts on Equality, Security and Justice. Res Publica, 26(4), 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Möller, Kai. (2012). The Global Model of Constitutional Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, T. (1995). Personal Rights and Public Space. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 24(2), 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, T. (2010). Proportionality in Perspective. New Zealand Law Review, 2010 (2), 369–391.Google Scholar
Ripstein, A. (2016). Reclaiming Proportionality. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 22(2), 24–31.Google Scholar
Tsakyrakis, S. (2009). Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(3), 468–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urbina, F. (2017). A Critique of Proportionality and Balancing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range
of users and attains the highest
(AAA)
level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive
accessibility guidelines.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.