Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- American Indian (1)
- Bentham (1)
- Blackstone (1)
- Class (1)
- Constitution (1)
-
- Courts (1)
- Feminist (1)
- Gender (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judgment (1)
- Judicial behavior (1)
- Law and humanities (1)
- Law and literature (1)
- Legal decisionmaking (1)
- Legal history (1)
- Legal reasoning (1)
- Method (1)
- Opinion (1)
- Performance (1)
- Perspective (1)
- Race (1)
- Rewritten (1)
- Ritual (1)
- Sexual orientation (1)
- Statute (1)
- Tax (1)
- Theory (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Introduction To Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions, Anthony C. Infanti, Bridget J. Crawford
Introduction To Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions, Anthony C. Infanti, Bridget J. Crawford
Book Chapters
Could a feminist perspective change the shape of the tax law? Most people understand that feminist reasoning has tremendous potential to affect, for example, the law of employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and reproductive rights. Few people may be aware, however, that feminist analysis can likewise transform tax law (as well as other statutory or code-based areas of the law). By highlighting the importance of perspective, background, and preconceptions on the reading and interpretation of statutes, Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions shows what a difference feminist analysis can make to statutory interpretation. This volume, part of the Feminist Judgments Series, brings …
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 …