AS PROBLEMÁTICAS E OS LIMITES DA ATUAÇÃO DA CORTE SUPREMA: a competência do Supremo Tribunal Federal e o ativismo judicial.
Authors: Cavalher Giselly Prado Silva , Pagani Lucas Augusto Gaioski , Dias Bruno Smolarek 
Published: July 2024

O presente artigo tem como objetivo analisar a atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal, partindo da análise da Separação dos Poderes, de suas competências constitucionais e dos limites/problemáticas de sua condução no chamado ativismo judicial. Pretende-se analisar algumas possíveis motivações para a atuação ativista, bem como identificar algumas práticas que, no entender deste artigo, violaram o devido processo constitucional, invadindo a competência prevista para os Poderes Legislativo e Executivo. A título exemplificativo, o artigo traz análise acerca do julgamento da ADI nº 4277 e da ADPF nº 132, relativo à caracterização de união estável em relações homoafetivas, bem como análise do recente julgamento da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos, que deixou de reconhecer o aborto como um direito constitucional.
 Palavras-chave: Separação dos Poderes. Competências do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ativismo Judicial. Relações homoafetivas. Direito ao aborto.
 
Abstract
This article aims to analyze the performance of the Federal Supreme Court, starting from the analysis of the Separation of Powers, its constitutional competences and the limits/problems of its conduction in the so-called judicial activism. It is intended to analyze some possible motivations for activist action, as well as to identify some practices that, in the understanding of this article, violated due constitutional process, invading the competence provided for the Legislative and Executive Powers. By way of example, the article brings an analysis of the judgment of ADI nº 4277 and ADPF nº 132, regarding the characterization of stable union in same-sex relationships, as well as an analysis of the recent judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, which failed to recognize abortion as a constitutional right.
Key-Words: Separation of Powers. Powers of the Federal Supreme Court. Judicial activism. Same-sex relationships. Right to abortion.
ABSTRACT
The objective of this article is to analyze the adequate conflict management system, comprising the jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional methods, from the proposal that the conflict manager must act in the construction of conflict solutions through appropriate techniques to the interests of the parties directly and indirectly embraced in the problem. For this, the technique adopted is the bibliographic-documentary review, through the incursion on the premises and inference of the conclusions by the deductive method. It examines, therefore, the access to justice from a conception of access to a fair legal order. Furthermore, it analyzes the multi-door system from the multiplicity of factors that determine a conflict and, therefore, its resolution. In turn, it examines the active participation of stakeholders in defining and implementing conflict management. In conclusion, it assesses that adequate conflict management should reflect the democratic order, in a way that the interests and stakeholders must focus on the definition of the conflict resolution method and its effective performance.
 
Keywords: Access to justice; Appropriate methods of conflict resolution; Multi-door system; Interest.