Repercussão Geral no Recurso Extraordinário e Precedentes Judiciais

Abstract

The General Compelling Reasons, as a requirement for the admissibility of the Extraordinary Appeal, underwent significant changes in its rules from Regimental Amendment No. 54, of 07/01/2020 to the Internal Regulations of the Federal Supreme Court, and the judgment of ARE No. 1,273,640. After a bibliographic analysis, it is concluded that such changes are capable of transforming this requirement into a filter of recursal relevance typical of the Supreme Courts. The various discourses of (de)legitimation of the Constitutional Jurisdiction in Democracies were investigated. Qualitative investigations of judgments of the Federal Supreme Court were added to the previous bibliographic analyzes, concluding that, despite being possible to glimpse typical characteristics of Courts of precedents, the possibility of individual judgment of appeals is more similar to the Courts of cassational feature. In addition, it was concluded that the decision-making individualism in the Supreme Court leaves room for arbitrariness, confirming the diagnosis of individually empowered Justices brought to the Court by the doctrine, with the potential to undermine the Court`s legitimacy.