Constitutional Review Models Quiz

Which type of decision allows for the future implementation of a statute to comply with the Constitution?

In which model of constitutional review are all regular courts able to pass review?

What distinguishes the Austrian Model in terms of the review process compared to the Hybrid Model?

What is a key feature of an appellate decision regarding the Legislature?

Which model of constitutional review allows for both a priori and a posteriori reviews?

Cassation Decisions

Annulment can be ab initio (from the beginning).
Abrogation is prospective.
A declaratory decision is possible.
It can be preventative.
Appellate decisions can involve the Constitutional Court appealing to the Legislature for specific provisions (explicitly, implicitly, with or without a time limit).

Interpretative Decisions

The Constitutional Court can use its interpretation to ensure future implementations of a statute comply with the Constitution.

Models of Constitutional Review

American Model

Decentralized review: all regular courts can review laws.
Incidenter review: occurs during regular court proceedings.
A posteriori review: review happens after a law is enacted.

Austrian Model

Centralized review: a specialized Constitutional Court handles reviews.
Principaliter review: special procedures are used.
A priori/a posteriori review: both before and after enactment.

Hybrid Model

Centralized review: a specialized Constitutional Court handles constitutional matters.
Principaliter/incidenter review: special or regular court proceedings.
A priori/a posteriori review: before and after enactment.

Test your knowledge on various models of constitutional review, including the American, Austrian, and Hybrid models. Explore key concepts such as annulment, abrogation, and the role of the Constitutional Court in interpreting laws. This quiz is essential for understanding how constitutional decisions impact legislative processes.