Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Morality (3)
- Ignorance (2)
- Mistakes (2)
- Adjudication (1)
- Article III (1)
-
- Bill of Rights (1)
- Cooper v. Aaron (1)
- Craig v. Boren (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Due Process Clause (1)
- Epistemic idea (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Free Speech Clause (1)
- Freedom (1)
- Griswold v. Connecticut (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Justified sanction (1)
- Kendall v. Kendall (1)
- Liberty schema (1)
- Regina v. Prince (1)
- Religion (1)
- Roe v. Wade (1)
- Texas v. Johnson (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler
Rights Against Rules: The Moral Structure Of American Constitutional Law, Matthew D. Adler
Michigan Law Review
The Bill of Rights, by means of open-ended terms such as "freedom of speech," "equal protection," or "due process," refers to moral criteria, which take on constitutional status by virtue of being thus referenced. We can disagree about whether the proper methodology for judicial application of these criteria is originalist or nonoriginalist. The originalist looks, not to the true content of the moral criteria named by the Constitution, but to the framers' beliefs about that content; the nonoriginalist tries to determine what the criteria truly require, and ignores or gives less weight to the framers' views. Bracketing this disagreement, however, …
Kahan On Mistakes, Daniel Yeager
Kahan On Mistakes, Daniel Yeager
Michigan Law Review
In Ignorance of Law Is an Excuse - but Only for the Virtuous, Professor Dan Kahan reconciles what I had thought was an irreconcilable body of law. To be sure, imposing order on whether and when mistakes of law should pass as responsibility-evading accounts of untoward actions is far from light work. Yet Kahan somehow pulls it off in just twenty-seven pages. In addition to acknowledging the importance of Professor Kahan's essay, I write here to point out if not correct what might have been two oversights in his view of the meaning and operation of mistakes. First, Kahan never …
Reply: Is Ignorance Of Fact An Excuse Only For The Virtuous?, Dan M. Kahan
Reply: Is Ignorance Of Fact An Excuse Only For The Virtuous?, Dan M. Kahan
Michigan Law Review
Professor Yeager's thoughtful response to my essay has convinced me that there is indeed a connection worth noting between the mistake of law doctrine and the mistake of fact doctrine. Yeager suggests that my position on mistake of law reduces to the view that someone who would be guilty of a "lesser wrong" were things as he perceived them to be may be punished for the "greater wrong" that he actually commits - a conception of mistake of fact that has provoked fierce denunciation from commentators. But I would in fact put things slightly differently: under both doctrines courts excuse …
Review Of What Are Freedoms For?, By John H. Garvey, Scott D. Pomfret
Review Of What Are Freedoms For?, By John H. Garvey, Scott D. Pomfret
Michigan Law Review
In 1988, Jeffrey Kendall and Barbara Zeitler Kendall were married. Though Jeffrey was Catholic at the time and Barbara was Jewish, the couple agreed to raise their children in Barbara's faith. In 1991, Jeffrey joined Boston Church of Christ, a fundamentalist Christian church. The tenets of that faith include a belief that those who do not accept Jesus Christ are damned to Hell, where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth." Barbara's faith also underwent a change during the marriage: she became an Orthodox Jew. Citing irreconcilable differences, the Kendalls sought a divorce in November, 1994. Before their marriage …