A Look at the Constitutional Court’s Function to Form Interpretation From the Legal Family Structure

Abstract

This article is addressed at questioning the legitimacy of constitutional interpretations in regards to the founding consequences they may bring; to this end, it uses judicial precedents on family structure in homosexual couples as the evidence bank. The article will show how legal methods alone cannot be the basis for interpreting the Constitution as conclusions to those interpretations will depend on the intended phase and different legal interpretation methods can end in contradictory conclusions about the same law. This situation results in a constitutional power that is not necessarily embodied in a court but may be evidenced in how decisions concerning family structure in homosexual couples have evolved; in this case, the Court has evidenced having a strong intention in the volitive phase of constitutional interpretation, thus leading to contradictory interpretations of article 42 of the Constitution concerning family structure in homosexual couples.