C O N C LU S I O N
9
Three extraordinary lawmakers—ratione materiae, ratione
supremitatis, and ratione necessitatis—appeared in the Wei-
mar Constitution and endanger the parliamentary legislative
state’s logically consistent system of legality, to which, de-
spite everything, the constitution intends to adhere. At this
point, the further complications that stem from the resulting
effects of the federal element of the constitution should re-
main entirely out of
account.1
One can surmise that, in such a
position, the ordinary parliamentary legislature may not have
withstood the attack of three extraordinary rivals. Indeed, this
supposition would be theoretically incorrect, so long as it re-
mains enmeshed in considerations of constitutional structure.
For where it is a matter of a fundamental political decision
on the constitution, which involves the complete state form,
the system the constitution decidedly adopts as a principle
of construction is always superior, so long as another system
just as fundamental and logically consistent [1958/336] is not
being established. The parliamentarism of the French Repub-
lic, for example, succeeded in making harmless and safe the ap-
proach to plebiscitary legitimacy contained in the possibility
of the dissolution of parliament under the constitutional law
of 1875. The complete ‘‘secularization’’ of the French state cor-
responds to a logically consistent, liberal value neutrality in
confessional and religious matters. For the foreseeable future,
a control of parliament through the exercise of a substantive
form of judicial review or other methods of the jurisdiction
state will not come into consideration in practical terms for
the French Republic. Certainly, these French constitutional
laws of 1875 limit themselves to organizational provisions and
do not recognize the extraordinary lawmakers of the Weimar
Constitution.2
Despite this, the parliamentary system of legality could have
remained victorious even under this constitution. For the de-
viations [1932/89] from the parliamentary legislative state’s
Previous Page Next Page