Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Adjudication (1)
- American legal theory (1)
- Anti-professionalism (1)
- Community morality (1)
- Constitution (1)
-
- Constitutional adjudication (1)
- Conventional morality (1)
- Imperativism (1)
- Imperativist (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- John Barth (1)
- Law and literature (1)
- Law-as-literature movement (1)
- Legal criticism (1)
- Legal ethics (1)
- Legal formalists (1)
- Legal realists (1)
- Mark Twain (1)
- Morality (1)
- Objective interpretivism (1)
- Objectivist (1)
- Objectivity (1)
- Owen Fiss (1)
- Pro-professionalism (1)
- Ronald Dworkin (1)
- Stanley Fish (1)
- Subjective interpretivism (1)
- Subjectivism (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law and Society
Adjudication Is Not Interpretation: Some Reservations About The Law-As-Literature Movement, Robin West
Adjudication Is Not Interpretation: Some Reservations About The Law-As-Literature Movement, Robin West
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Among other achievements, the modern law-as-literature movement has prompted increasing numbers of legal scholars to embrace the claim that adjudication is interpretation, and more specifically, that constitutional adjudication is interpretation of the Constitution. That adjudication is interpretation -- that an adjudicative act is an interpretive act -- more than any other central commitment, unifies the otherwise diverse strands of the legal and constitutional theory of the late twentieth century.
In this article, I will argue in this article against both modern forms of interpretivism. The analogue of law to literature, on which much of modern interpretivism is based, although fruitful, …
On The Indeterminacy Crisis: Critiquing Critical Dogma, Lawrence B. Solum
On The Indeterminacy Crisis: Critiquing Critical Dogma, Lawrence B. Solum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Critical legal scholarship challenges the liberal claim that modern western societies are characterized by "the rule of law." The liberal conception of the rule of law, critical scholars contend, serves to mystify and legitimate the legal system and thereby obscure the real issues behind individual cases as well as the real nature of the legal system. Frequently, the claim that legal rules are indeterminate is the starting point for such a critique of the rule of law. What I call the indeterminacy thesis goes roughly like this: the existing body of legal doctrines-statutes, administrative regulations, and court decisions-permits a judge …