Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Supremacy and hegemony

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin. / Allan, J.; Campbell, D.
In: Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 48, No. 1, 31.03.2021, p. 120-124.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Allan, J & Campbell, D 2021, 'Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin', Journal of Law and Society, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12281

APA

Allan, J., & Campbell, D. (2021). Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin. Journal of Law and Society, 48(1), 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12281

Vancouver

Allan J, Campbell D. Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin. Journal of Law and Society. 2021 Mar 31;48(1):120-124. Epub 2021 Feb 11. doi: 10.1111/jols.12281

Author

Allan, J. ; Campbell, D. / Supremacy and hegemony : a reply to Palmer and Martin. In: Journal of Law and Society. 2021 ; Vol. 48, No. 1. pp. 120-124.

Bibtex

@article{bbe958e46a534d13a01e325247652149,
title = "Supremacy and hegemony: a reply to Palmer and Martin",
abstract = "In a 2019 article in this journal, which drew on previous work, we argued by examination of a number of extremely important cases that the senior judiciary is in the process of attempting to create judicial supremacy in the UK. It is doing so, not by democratic debate, but by legal procedural innovation incomprehensible to the electorate. Invited by the journal to reply to a criticism of our argument by Dr Stephanie Palmer and Dr Stevie Martin, we have sought to defend our account of the undemocratic procedural novelty of those cases. ",
author = "J. Allan and D. Campbell",
year = "2021",
month = mar,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1111/jols.12281",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "120--124",
journal = "Journal of Law and Society",
issn = "0263-323X",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Supremacy and hegemony

T2 - a reply to Palmer and Martin

AU - Allan, J.

AU - Campbell, D.

PY - 2021/3/31

Y1 - 2021/3/31

N2 - In a 2019 article in this journal, which drew on previous work, we argued by examination of a number of extremely important cases that the senior judiciary is in the process of attempting to create judicial supremacy in the UK. It is doing so, not by democratic debate, but by legal procedural innovation incomprehensible to the electorate. Invited by the journal to reply to a criticism of our argument by Dr Stephanie Palmer and Dr Stevie Martin, we have sought to defend our account of the undemocratic procedural novelty of those cases. 

AB - In a 2019 article in this journal, which drew on previous work, we argued by examination of a number of extremely important cases that the senior judiciary is in the process of attempting to create judicial supremacy in the UK. It is doing so, not by democratic debate, but by legal procedural innovation incomprehensible to the electorate. Invited by the journal to reply to a criticism of our argument by Dr Stephanie Palmer and Dr Stevie Martin, we have sought to defend our account of the undemocratic procedural novelty of those cases. 

U2 - 10.1111/jols.12281

DO - 10.1111/jols.12281

M3 - Journal article

VL - 48

SP - 120

EP - 124

JO - Journal of Law and Society

JF - Journal of Law and Society

SN - 0263-323X

IS - 1

ER -