Schmitt Defeated by Montesquieu. A Handful of Reflections on “The Constitutional Theory” by Carl Schmitt

“Constitutional Theory” by Carl Schmitt has undeniable value. The author highlights the difference between fundamental regulations and a set of minor and insignificant norms contained in constitutional acts. The distinction offered by Schmitt opposes dogmatization of reflections on the constitution and encourages synthetic perspectives identifying the constitutional identity of a country. Remarkably, Schmitt inspired the thought about the introduction of supra constitutional norms that may amended using ordinary procedures. Had Schmitt been as sensitive and thorough as Montesquieu, he would not have cut down on the amount of historical materials used in the name of theoretical purity. Meanwhile, his classification of political systems includes only monarchy and democracy. Similarly, Schmitt’s interpretation of legal validity is oversimplified as it is limited to conformity with a nation’s will, even if expressed by silence. In such a perspective, every enacted constitution would have the attribute of legal validity. The theses offered by Schmitt cannot be recognized as a novelty within the field of constitutional law scholarship. The work of classic thinkers shall be subject to critical interpretation. This is a

Pobierz plik (Ujazdowski.pdf)Ujazdowski.pdf294 kB
UJ logo logo Utriusque Iuris


W latach 2019–2020 czasopismo wydawane jest w ramach programu „Wsparcie dla czasopism naukowych” Ministerstwa Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego.

Czasopismo jest ujęte w bazie European Reference Index for Humanities and Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS) oraz w bazie HeinOnline.


Ten adres pocztowy jest chroniony przed spamowaniem. Aby go zobaczyć, konieczne jest włączenie w przeglądarce obsługi JavaScript. 

© Forum Prawnicze 2022