O ativismo judicial em face das mutações inconstitucionais

Abstract

The present work aims to approach that the constitutional control arose from the symbolic case of Marbury X Madison, from that decision, began to seek a greater balance between the rules, which made the constitutional control essential in the legal world, being regulated and described in the Federal Constitution of 1988. As a result, new tools emerged, so that there could be greater legal certainty in relation to the strategies addressed, such as example or activism, and soon after a constitutional change, however, the phenomenon occurred according to a Constitution, if this is not available, to be contrary to it, it must be assembled together with the constitutional norm and reality. In other words, it is not enough that there is a simple change in reality, a mutation depends on the condition in which to find support and not to modify the structure of the Constitution. It turns out that an absence of regulatory legislation on the prohibitions of judicial activity to set the limits of performance brings a strong legal uncertainty, even generating unconstitutional mutations, which often does not take into account for fundamental rights and principles. This is what will be analyzed in this research.