Filtered Constitutional Review and the Reconfiguration of Inter-Judicial Relations

Abstract

Filtered constitutional review is a restrictive form of concrete review allowing supreme court judges to filter constitutional referrals prior to their examination by the constitutional court. Though its introduction is unlikely, alone, to have much impact on power structures within the judiciary, “captured” legislative committees and legal scholars acting as a “highly specialised lobby” may be in position to amplify its effect on inter-judicial relations. Blending institutionalist-rationalist accounts of judicial behaviour with Mancur Olson’s logic of collective action, I show how the constitutional law professoriate and key legislators managed to influence the implementation and early application by French supreme courts of a new filtered review mechanism.