{"id":664,"date":"2018-02-01T15:05:11","date_gmt":"2018-02-01T15:05:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/?p=664"},"modified":"2018-02-01T15:05:11","modified_gmt":"2018-02-01T15:05:11","slug":"constitutional-empathy-and-judicial-dialogue-in-the-eu","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/2018\/02\/01\/constitutional-empathy-and-judicial-dialogue-in-the-eu\/","title":{"rendered":"Constitutional Empathy and Judicial Dialogue in the EU"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span class=\"js-work-more-abstract-untruncated\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-665 size-medium alignleft\" src=\"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18-193x300.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"193\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18-193x300.png 193w, https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18-660x1024.png 660w, https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18-624x968.png 624w, https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/90\/2018\/02\/Captura-de-pantalla-2018-02-01-a-las-16.03.18.png 722w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 193px) 100vw, 193px\" \/><\/a>L. Arroyo Jim\u00e9nez, \u201cConstitutional Empathy and Judicial Dialogue in the EU\u00bb, 24-1 <em>European Public Law<\/em>, 2018, pp. 57-72. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"js-work-more-abstract-untruncated\">In a context of legal pluralism, empathy becomes a constitutional virtue. Legal interfaces governing intersystem relations among EU and national laws must be devised and implemented accordingly. This article explores some of the conclusions that might be drawn from this in the area of judicial dialogue, particularly from the perspective of the Member States\u2019 Constitutional or Supreme courts. As for the formalized dialogue, analysing the structure of communication interfaces provides, on the one hand, a better understanding of the functions and rhetorical styles of references made by different national courts. On the other hand, the concept of constitutional empathy also allows for inferring rules of conduct in terms of drafting requests for preliminary rulings. With respect to non-formalized judicial dialogue, the paper argues that an empathetic design of legal interfaces might help national Constitutional or Supreme courts to improve the reception of driving forces that stem from EU law, both in their own case law and as regards EU law implementation by ordinary courts. <\/span><\/p>\n<p>Accesible <a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/35813449\/Constitutional_Empathy_and_Judicial_Dialogue_in_the_European_Union\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">aqu\u00ed<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>L. Arroyo Jim\u00e9nez, \u201cConstitutional Empathy and Judicial Dialogue in the EU\u00bb, 24-1 European Public Law, 2018, pp. 57-72. In a context of legal pluralism, empathy becomes a constitutional virtue. Legal interfaces governing intersystem relations among EU and national laws must be devised and implemented accordingly. This article explores some of the conclusions that might be [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-664","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sin-categoria"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/664","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=664"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/664\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=664"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=664"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.uclm.es\/luisarroyo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=664"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}