Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law and Society (19)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (11)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (8)
- Administrative Law (7)
- Law and Gender (7)
-
- Sociology (7)
- Anthropology (6)
- Courts (6)
- Economics (6)
- Land Use Law (6)
- Law and Politics (6)
- Political Economy (6)
- Constitutional Law (5)
- Education Law (5)
- Inequality and Stratification (5)
- Internet Law (5)
- Law and Philosophy (5)
- Law and Race (5)
- Legislation (5)
- Property Law and Real Estate (5)
- Social and Cultural Anthropology (5)
- Arts and Humanities (4)
- Business (4)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (4)
- Environmental Law (4)
- International Law (4)
- Jurisdiction (4)
- Jurisprudence (4)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (4)
- Keyword
-
- Race (3)
- Campus sexual assault (2)
- Class (2)
- Dear Colleague Letter (2)
- Education (2)
-
- Environmental law (2)
- Environmentalism (2)
- Gender (2)
- Judges (2)
- Jurisdiction (2)
- Land use (2)
- Pragmatism (2)
- Preemption (2)
- Privacy (2)
- Sex discrimination (2)
- Sexual assault (2)
- Title IX (2)
- Trump (2)
- 501(c)(5) (1)
- ADA (1)
- Activism (1)
- Advocacy (1)
- Agriculture (1)
- Alternative dispute resolution (1)
- American Bar Association (1)
- American Indian (1)
- Arbitrators (1)
- Assisted suicide (1)
- Bentham (1)
- Bioethics (1)
- Publication
Articles 31 - 31 of 31
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Blackstone, Expositor And Censor Of Law Both Made And Found, Jessie Allen
Blackstone, Expositor And Censor Of Law Both Made And Found, Jessie Allen
Book Chapters
Jeremy Bentham famously insisted on the separation of law as it is and law as it should be, and criticized his contemporary William Blackstone for mixing up the two. According to Bentham, Blackstone costumes judicial invention as discovery, obscuring the way judges make new law while pretending to uncover preexisting legal meaning. Bentham’s critique of judicial phoniness persists to this day in claims that judges are “politicians in robes” who pick the outcome they desire and rationalize it with doctrinal sophistry. Such skeptical attacks are usually met with attempts to defend doctrinal interpretation as a partial or occasional limit on …