Abstract
AbstractInA Cosmopolitan Legal Order: Kant, Constitutional Justice and the European Convention on Human Rights, Alec Stone Sweet and Clare Ryan argue that there has been the emergence of, and increasing prospects for, a cosmopolitan legal order based on the Convention. This symposium aims to engage with, and to better explore, the theoretical implications and practical legal ramifications of their argument. In doing so, this first article acts as a general introduction to the symposium, laying out the major arguments of the book as well as arguments presented by the symposium contributors. Moving beyond the summative, this introduction also situatesA Cosmopolitan Legal Oderwithin broader debates in global constitutionalism, while defending its use of Kant’s cosmopolitan theory. Lastly, it explores some of the key implications and challenges that arise from the symposium itself, rooting these insights within the current context of anti-globalism, nationalism, populism and neo-sovereigntism, and the corresponding necessity for a more transitional and pluralistic response as offered inA Cosmopolitan Legal Order.
Highlights
The twenty-first century has witnessed the rise of two antithetical movements in international legal theory and practice
In A Cosmopolitan Legal Order: Kant, Constitutional Justice and the European Convention on Human Rights, Alec Stone Sweet and Clare Ryan argue that there has been the emergence of, and increasing prospects for, a cosmopolitan legal order based on the Convention
This first article acts as a general introduction to the symposium, laying out the major arguments of the book as well as arguments presented by the symposium contributors. This introduction situates A Cosmopolitan Legal Oder within broader debates in global constitutionalism, while defending its use of Kant’s cosmopolitan theory. It explores some of the key implications and challenges that arise from the symposium itself, rooting these insights within the current context of antiglobalism, nationalism, populism and neo-sovereigntism, and the corresponding necessity for a more transitional and pluralistic response as offered in A Cosmopolitan Legal Order
Summary
The twenty-first century has witnessed the rise of two antithetical movements in international legal theory and practice. Bush,[4] and has accelerated with the rise of populism in the United States and Europe, is often seen as directly opposed to ideas of a cosmopolitan legal order.[5] there are arguments to suggest that the binary between state self-determination and global constitutionalism is theoretically overplayed,[6] in practice present-day dynamics suggest a tension between globalization and globalism on one side, and particularism and the rise of antiglobalization sentiment on the other This potential tension has been accelerated (or made more obvious) by the impact of international agreements and international courts on an unprecedented scale: the combined force of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the European Union (EU) with its Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), investment treaty agreements with arbitral tribunals, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) itself with other regional courts, and the UN system, empowering domestic courts in their review of national authorities from which political pushback can arise. It is against this current global backdrop that Alec Stone Sweet and Clare Ryan propose the emergence of, and increasing prospects for, a ‘cosmopolitan legal order’ based on the European Convention on Human
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
