Legal argumentation in a constitutional state of rights and justice.

Abstract

Within a constitutional state of rights and justice, the way in which the jurisdictional and constitutional bodies argue their decisions is different from the way in which they are motivated in a state of legal law. A review of doctrine, jurisprudence and constitutional dogmatics was made on the argumentation in a constitutional state of rights and justice. Here the stages of the theory of argumentation were developed in order to understand the necessary parameters that help to produce ideas that serve as support or support when talking about arguing, since it is not the same as interpreting a law, in order to do so. this way to generate new ways of specifying the law in our state.