Biography

Nicola is reading for a D.Phil at the University of Oxford, Exeter College. He holds the following degrees: LLm, Yale Law School (2020); M.Phil, University of São Paulo (2018); B.A, Pontifical Catholic Univeristy of São Paulo (2017). Nicola is also an Associate Researcher at Fundação Getúlio Vargas-SP and has held multiple scholarships in Brazil. His main fields of interest are comparative constitutional law, constitutional change, institutional design and democratic theory.

Currently, Nicola is invested in the research of legislative obligations and their enforcement. Under the supervision of Professor Nicholas Barber, his thesis investigates how constitutions establish obligations towards the legislature and what courts may do and have done when legislatures fail to fulfill these constitutional obligations. 

Nicola is also engaged in the study of unconstitutional constitutional amendments. He is currently putting together a database that gathers all constitutional review decisions of constitutional amendments in the world in an attempt to better understand unconstitutional constitutional amendments from a quantitative perspective. 

His publications are available on academia and SSRN

Publications

Recent additions

  • Nicola Tommasini, Pedro Arcain Riccetto and Yaniv Roznai, 'When Backlashes & Overrides Do Not Scare: The Power to Review Constitutional Amendments and the Case of Brazil’s Supreme Court' (2020) International Journal of Constitutional Studies and Human Rights Forthcoming
  • Nicola Tommasini and Roberto Dias, 'Critical Reflection on the ex officio declaration of unconstitutionality' (2018) 5 Revista de Investigações Constitucionais 187
    For access: https://www.academia.edu/37338652/Reflex%C3%B5es_cr%C3%ADticas_sobre_a_declara%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_inconstitucionalidade_de_of%C3%ADcio
  • Gabriel Calil, Nicola Tommasini and Dimitri Dimoulis, 'Recurso extraordinário e Reclamação Constitucional: uma análise da linha jurisprudencial do Supremo Tribunal Federal' (2016) 34 Revista Brasileira de Estudos Constitucionais 81
    For access: https://www.academia.edu/36093813/Recurso_extraordin%C3%A1rio_e_Reclama%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Constitucional_uma_an%C3%A1lise_da_linha_jurisprudencial_do_Supremo_Tribunal_Federal
    The article examines the Brazilian Supreme Court’s understanding in respect to the possibility of a Constitutional Complaint (reclamação constitucional) in order to guarantee the authority of a decision made in extraordinary appeal with recognized general repercussion (recurso extraordinário comrepercussão geral). By way of a “precedent tree” methodology, developed by Lopez Medina, the article shows that the Supreme Court asserts the impossibility of the Constitutional Complaint as a remedy in this case, but does so in a confusing and contradictory way.

Journal Article (3)

Nicola Tommasini, Pedro Arcain Riccetto and Yaniv Roznai, 'When Backlashes & Overrides Do Not Scare: The Power to Review Constitutional Amendments and the Case of Brazil’s Supreme Court' (2020) International Journal of Constitutional Studies and Human Rights Forthcoming
Nicola Tommasini and Roberto Dias, 'Critical Reflection on the ex officio declaration of unconstitutionality' (2018) 5 Revista de Investigações Constitucionais 187
For access: https://www.academia.edu/37338652/Reflex%C3%B5es_cr%C3%ADticas_sobre_a_declara%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_inconstitucionalidade_de_of%C3%ADcio
Gabriel Calil, Nicola Tommasini and Dimitri Dimoulis, 'Recurso extraordinário e Reclamação Constitucional: uma análise da linha jurisprudencial do Supremo Tribunal Federal' (2016) 34 Revista Brasileira de Estudos Constitucionais 81
For access: https://www.academia.edu/36093813/Recurso_extraordin%C3%A1rio_e_Reclama%C3%A7%C3%A3o_Constitucional_uma_an%C3%A1lise_da_linha_jurisprudencial_do_Supremo_Tribunal_Federal
The article examines the Brazilian Supreme Court’s understanding in respect to the possibility of a Constitutional Complaint (reclamação constitucional) in order to guarantee the authority of a decision made in extraordinary appeal with recognized general repercussion (recurso extraordinário comrepercussão geral). By way of a “precedent tree” methodology, developed by Lopez Medina, the article shows that the Supreme Court asserts the impossibility of the Constitutional Complaint as a remedy in this case, but does so in a confusing and contradictory way.

Research Interests

Comparative Constitutional Law, Institutional Design, Constitutional Change, Constitutional Amendments, Democratic Theory. 

Research projects