12.03.2013

Anna Kronlund, MA, L.Soc.Sc., Ph.D. Candidate

E-mail: anna.kronlund(a)jyu.fi

 

The rhetoric of  exception in the U.S. Congress debates after World War II

This study examines the rhetoric of exception in the selected U.S. Congress debates after World War II. One example of the debates studied more in detail is the National Emergencies Act of 1976. The figure of the exception serves as a tool of analyzing the relationship between the executive and the legislative in times of emergency. The main emphasis is on a question of how a government can prepare for exceptional and unforeseen situations without shifting powers from the legislative to the executive branch?  Particular attention is given to conceptual and rhetorical characteristic of the concept of exception when studying the primary sources both in a theoretical and historical perspective.

The theoretical framework of the study lies in the debates surrounding the Weimar Republic’s Constitution 1919 as interpreted by its creators and juridical interpreters, such as Carl Schmitt.  The history of the concept of the exception, especially the debates of the Weimar constitution among contemporary politicians and scholars is addressed as a perspective of analysis for examining the U.S. Congress debates. Thesis focus is directed toward notion of two opposite alternatives in constitutional law, considered on the basis of the extensive analysis of the parliamentary debates.


Research visits abroad:

DAAD- scholarship: Greifswald – Institut für Politikwissenschaft 1/1/2009-31/3/2009

ASLA-Fulbright Graduate grant for conducting research in the United States for academic year 2009-2010