Abstract:
The article analyzes the nomination procedure of United States (US) Supreme Court justices in a comparative perspective with the appointment processes of the judges of the Italian Constitutional Court and of the French Constitutional Council. It addresses the institutional features of the US ‘advice and consent’ procedure and the professional qualification that have historically emerged as conditions to be appointed to the highest US federal bench. It then explores the corresponding practices in Italy and France, also by examining the recent legal reforms that have occurred in the two European countries. Finally, the article underscores the main similarities and differences between the models considered and highlights some general trends in the appointment process of constitutional judges.
Table of Contents:
1. Introduzione.
2. Il procedimento di nomina dei giudici della Corte suprema USA.
– 2.1. Gli attori coinvolti nel procedimento.
– 2.2. I requisiti soggettivi di nomina.
3. Prospettive di comparazione tra modelli.
– 3.1. Il procedimento di nomina dei giudici della Corte costituzionale italiana.
– 3.2. Il procedimento di nomina dei giudici del Consiglio costituzionale francese.
4. Conclusione.