Abstract: The increasing political stake of constitutional court decisions generates challenges and disputes on both the legitimacy of judicial review as such and the systems of appointment of constitutional justices. However, legal theory remains focused on the patterns of judicial process as long as jurisprudence is considered as a prophecy of what the highest court will do in fact (O.W. Holmes). Given the substantial increase and acceleration of the output of legal rules, a switch of emphasis in scientific research toward the legislative process would be highly appropriate. According to the followers of “legisprudence” the role and scope of legal rules and of legitimacy of nomothetic bodies are to be reconsidered.

Keywords: judicial review, legisprudence, Romanian Constitutional Court, rule of law