Supreme Court rulings at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic: impacts on Brazilian federalism?

Author:

Fernandes Fernando Manuel Bessa1ORCID,Ouverney Assis Luiz Mafort1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz), Brasil; Departamento de Ciências Sociais (DCS), Brasil

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the current pandemic context, the Supreme Court (STF) is a rich field of research for understanding how political-ideological disputes are intertwined with bureaucratic-administrative issues. Authors argue that the STF tends to issue more favorable rulings to the Federal Government than to the states or municipalities in interfederative disputes. This paper aimed to analyze and reflect on the decision-making impact of the STF on government actions within the debate on interfederative relation- ships, considering the current context and verifying whether the pandemic changes such trend of favoring the Federal Government. Thirty-three collegiate rulings were made using the keywords “Coronavirus” and “Covid-19” and the first half of 2020 as a chronological landmark. A typology was constructed for the analysis: ‘Regulation and Territorial Management’, ‘Health Policies and Services’, ‘Employment and Income’, ‘Public Finance’, and ‘Others’. In a context marked by tensions and omissions, the role of the STF in resolving conflicts of interfederative competence was reinforced, suggesting an inversion of the centralist tendency in Brazilian jurisprudence. On the other hand, we could question the extent to which this situation could reinforce the role of subnational entities and, therefore, of Brazilian federalism.

Publisher

FapUNIFESP (SciELO)

Reference23 articles.

1. Responsabilidade do Estado e direito à saúde no Brasil: um balanço da atuação dos Poderes;Baptista TWF;Ciênc. Saúde Colet,2009

2. Judicialização da saúde, acesso à justiça e a efetividade do direito à saúde;Ventura M;Physis (Rio J.),2010

3. Pandemia da Covid-19 e a judicialização da saúde: estudo de caso explicativo;Carvalho EC;Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem,2020

4. A judicialização da política conduz à politização da justiça;Maciel Neto PB;Conjur,2015

5. Judicialização ou ativismo judicial? Entenda a diferença!;Medeiros A;Politize!,2016

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3