How well can legislatures evaluate the constitutional questions that are inevitably bound up with regulation of the political process? Modern parliamentary systems have developed forms of “rights-vetting” using specialized committees and ministry units to consider constitutional questions. Designing such institutions requires careful consideration of their ability to perform rights-vetting in a timely manner. The United States lacks such institutions in Congress, and creating them would be difficult in light of the congressional committee structure.
Legisprudence aims at contributing to the improvement of legislation by studying the processes of legislation from the perspective of legal theory. The content of the journal covers legislation in a broad sense. This comprises legislation in both the formal and the material sense (from national and European parliaments, regulation, international law), and alternatives to legislation (covenants, sunset legislation, etc.). It also takes in regulation (pseudo-legislation, codes of behaviour and deontological codes, etc.). The journal is theoretical and reflective. Contributions to the journal make use of an interdisciplinary method in legal theory. Comparative and system transcending approaches are encouraged. Sociological, historical, or economic studies are taken into account to the extent that they are relevant from the perspective of interdisciplinary legal theory. Dogmatic descriptions of positive law are not taken into consideration.