Comparative Administrative Law
Show Less

Comparative Administrative Law

Edited by Susan Rose-Ackerman and Peter L. Lindseth

This research handbook is a comprehensive overview of the field of comparative administrative law. The specially commissioned chapters in this landmark volume represent a broad, multi-method approach combining perspectives from history and social science with more strictly legal analyses. Comparisons of the United States, continental Europe, and the British Commonwealth are complemented by contributions that focus on Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The work aims to stimulate comparative research on public law, reaching across countries and scholarly disciplines.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 7: Written Constitutions and the Administrative State: On the Constitutional Character of Administrative Law

Tom Ginsburg


Tom Ginsburg Administrative law is the poor relation of public law; the hard-working, unglamorous cousin laboring in the shadow of constitutional law. Constitutional law, it is generally believed, resolves the great issues of state and society, while administrative law, in its best moments, merely refines those principles for dealing with the administrative state. Law students flock to constitutional law classes, of which most law schools have three or four in the curriculum. The same students enroll in administrative law with a sense of obligation, as if the subject is a chore one has to manage. The two fields are, of course, intimately related, and share an overarching purpose of managing the relationship between state and citizen, with an emphasis on protection of the latter in democratic states. On the other hand, the fields reflect different legal sources and modalities. In some countries, they are adjudicated by entirely different courts. While constitutional law is becoming ever more comparative, with judges regularly citing each other’s opinions, administrative law remains bound to the nation state. This chapter makes three arguments. First, it argues that the conceptual division between administrative and constitutional law is quite porous, and that along many dimensions, administrative law can be considered more constitutional in character than constitutions. Second, it shows that written constitutions do relatively little to legally constrain the administrative state. Rather, their role is to establish the broader structural apparatus of governance and accountability, in which the bureaucracy is the great unspoken. This leaves administrative law as...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.