THE METASTATIC LIMBO BETWEEN THE HERMENEUTIC-CONSTITUTIONAL (MIS)INTERPRETATION OF THE STF, THE META-PRINCIPLE OF THE LEGAL RESERVE AND THE STONY CLAUSE OF THE SEPARATION OF powers

Abstract

The 1st Part - The Doctrinal and Gnosiological Outlines Affected to the Constitutional Exegesis of the STF - brings a collection of thinkers in the wake of the Philosophy of Law in order to guide the debate from a degree, merely, factual to a more perfunctory level on the limits in which the STF comes up against its supreme constitutional interpretation. In the 2nd Part - Brazilian (Neo) Constitutionalism: A Reflection on the Implications of the Non-Observance of the Legal Reserve Principle -, the debate gains new nuances, as the question now is to understand to which jus-ideological aspect the STF tends to lean in its interpretations of the Constitution and the consequences this brings to the Brazilian Legal System. In the 3rd Part - Hermeneutics, Law and STF: The Separation of Powers in the Light of the Theory of Shared Constitutional Authority and the Theory of Institutional Capacities - there is the apex of this academic research, since after the conclusions of the previous parts it is possible to elucidate a way to “medicate” the metastatic limbo that afflicts the country's Supreme Court with the brilliant theories in the title of this part as its mainstay.