Constitutional review in the member states of the EU-28 : a political analysis of institutional choices

Literature in law and political science has suggested a number of factors explaining choices on the implementation constitutional review. However, so far little is known about how such factors combine in order to lead to different models of review. With the aid of configurational research, this article sheds light on that question for all countries of the current EU-28. In this region, the Kelsenian model of specialized courts, the system of review by the judicial branch, and the model of parliamentary sovereignty still nowadays coexist. This article shows that phenomena such as the type of legal family of the country, existence of authoritarian backgrounds or political fragmentation played a major role in choices of models of constitutional review. However, it was only when they combined that they were capable of leading to particular outcomes.