Email this article 
Procedural due process of law in the United States Supreme Court: building an instrumental safeguard
Abstract
This paper aims to reconstruct the history and evolution of the procedural due process of law in the United States Supreme Court Precedents. Besides casting light over the period of the formation of this procedural safeguard, that would become the center of modern civil procedure, exerting considerable influence over Brazilian scholars, the purpose of the paper is to clarify that, however important, due process is currently seen as an instrumental safeguard, subject to ponderation with other values at stake in the case.
Keywords
References
BAYLES, Michael D. Procedural justice: allocating to individual. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.
BERGER, Raoul. Law of the Land Reconsidered. In: Northwestern University Law Review, vol. 74, n. 1, 1979, p. 1-30.
BICKEL, Alexander. The least dangerous bench. 2nd ed. Binghamton: Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc., 1986.
CARNEIRO, Maria Francisca. Devido Processo Legal. Porto Alegre: Sérgio Antonio Fabris, 1999.
CASTRO, Carlos Roberto Siqueira. O devido processo legal e os princípios da razoabilidade e da proporcionalidade. 5. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Forense, 2010.
COOLEY, Thomas McIntyre. A treatise on the constitutional limitations which rest upon the legislative power of the states of the American union. 7th edition. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1903.
CORWIN, Edward S. The doctrine of due process of law before the civil war. In: Harvard Law Review, vol. 24, 1911, p. 366-385.
EASTERBROOK, Frank. Substance and due process. In: The Supreme Court Review, 1982, p. 85-125.
EBERLE, Edward J. Procedural due process: the original understanding. In: Constitutional Commentary, vol. 4, 1987, p. 339-362.
EDMONDSON, Paul W. Historic Preservation Regulation and Procedural Due Process. In: Ecology Law Quarterly, vol. 9, 1978, p. 743-775.
ELY, John Hart. Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.
EPSTEIN, Richard A. Coniston Corp v Village of Hoffman Hills: How to Make Procedural Due Process Disappear. In: University of Chicago Law Review, n. 74, 2007, p. 1689-1703.
FRIENDLY, Henry. Some Kind of hearing. In: University of Pennsylvania Law Review, n. 123, 1975, p. 1267-1317.
FORKOSCH, Morris D. Brooklyn Law Review, vol. 24, 1978, p. 173-253.
GARNER, Bryan A. (ed.) Black`s Law Dictionary. 9. ed. St. Paul: Thomson Reuters, 2009.
HYMAN, Andrew. The little word due. In: Akron Law Review, vol. 38, 2005, p. 1-51.
JUROW, Keith. Untimely Thoughts: A Reconsideration of the Origins of Due Process of Law. In: The American Journal of Legal History, vol. XIX, 1975, p. 265-279.
MARTEL, Letícia de Campos Velho. Devido processo legal substantivo: razão abstrata, função e características de aplicabilidade. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Lumen Juris, 2005.
MASHAW, Jerry. The Supreme Court’s Due Process Calculus for Administrative Adjudication in Mathews v. Eldridge: Three Factors in Search of a Theory of Value. In: The University of Chicago Law Review, 1976, p. 28-59.
MEYER, Martin. The idea of justice and the poor. In: The Public Interest, n. 8, p. 96-115, 1967.
MIXON, Donn. Procedural due process and the teacher. In: Arkansas Law Review, vol. 29, 1975, p. 87-103.
MOTT, Rodney L. Due process of law: a historical and analytical treatise of the principles and methods followed by the courts in the application of the concept of the “law of the land”. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merril Company Publishers, 1926.
MYKKELTVEDT, Roald Y. Procedural due process: the fair trial rule revisited. In: Mercer Law Review, vol. 24, 1973, p. 621-649.
NERY Jr., Nelson. Princípios do Processo Civil na Constituição Federal. 8. ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2006.
PEREIRA, Ruitemberg Nunes. O princípio do devido processo legal substantivo. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Renovar, 2005.
PLATÃO. Apologia de Sócrates. Tradução de Maria Lacerda de Souza. Disponível em: http://www.dominiopublico.gov.br/download/texto/cv000065.pdf.
REA, John C. Procedural Due Process in Parole Release Decisions. In: Arizona Law Review, vol. 18, 1976, p. 1023-1060.
RENDLEMAN, Doug. The new due process: rights and remedies. In: Kentucky Law Journal, vol. 63, 1975, p. 531-674.
ROSENTHAL, Lawrence. Does due process have an original meaning? On originalism, due process, procedural innovation...and parking tickets. In: Oklahoma Law Review, vol. 60, n. 1, 2007, p. 1-52.
SILVEIRA, Paulo Fernando. Devido processo legal. 3. ed. Belo Horizonte: Del Rey, 2001.
STEVENS, Richard G. Frankfurter and due process. Lanham: United Press of America, 1987.
STEVENS, Richard G. Book review of W. Mendelson, Justices Black and Frankfurter: conflict in the court. In: William and Mary Law Review, vol. 3, 1961, p. 206-218.
TRIBE, Laurence e MATZ, Joshua. Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2014.
YOSHIKAWA, Eduardo Henrique de Oliveira. Origem e Evolução do Devido Processo Legal Substantivo: o Controle da Razoabilidade das Leis do Século XVII ao XXI. São Paulo: Editora Letras Jurídicas, 2007.
WASSERMAN, Rhonda. Procedural due process: a reference guide to the United States Constitution. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2004.
WILLIAMS, Ryan C. The One and Only Substantive Due Process Clause. In: Yale Law Journal, vol. 120, 2010, p. 408-512.
WOODSIDE, Frank C; SCHAEFER, Jeffrey R. The future of due process during discovery and what would Wigmore have to made of Daubert? In: “Due process be damned”: 1995 annual meeting, The Fairmont, San Francisco, California. Manuscrito.
ZIMET, Barbara T. R. Ancient Athenian Procedural Due Process: A Reflection of Societal Values. In: The American University Law Review, vol. 23, 1973, p. 485-511.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18256/2238-0604.2019.v15i1.2053
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
ISSN 2238-0604
This Revista Brasileira de Direito is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Indexers
 |  |  | ||
 |  |  | ||
 |  |  | ||
 |  |  | ||
 |  |  | ||
 |  |