Law Commons^™

The Judicial Philosophy Of Justice Rehnquist, Robert E. Riggs, Thomas D. Proffitt

Akron Law Review

In defining the contours of the Rehnquist judicial philosophy, this article will examine three sources: (1) ideas articulated by Justice Rehnquist in opinions and other writings, (2) values implicit in his pattern of decision-making as distilled from the decided cases, and (3) ideas attributed to him by others. Information from each source will be examined separately for light it sheds on the Rehnquist judicial philosophy, and each is assigned its own label. Thus, this article will refer to the self-articulated philosophy (as reflected in the Justice's writings), the attributed philosophy (as reflected in the writings of others), and the operative …

Hohfeld's Cube, Mark Andrews

Akron Law Review

The thesis presented here is that the eight jural relations may be effectively graphed as the eight corners of a cube, and this image unifies all eight into a single logical structure. This structure symbolizes real legal relationships and assists an understanding of the way legal relations work. This article, then, is about Hohfeld's Cube.

The validity of the cube will be shown in three stages. First, the eight jural relations will be arranged on the cube in a manner which seems to best characterize the way Hohfeld intended his concepts to be used and which also seems to construct …

Can We Afford Liberty?, Arthur J. Goldberg

Akron Law Review

I would like to venture the suggestion, however, that the real gravamen of Chief Justice Burger's address has been overlooked. In a very real sense, the Chief Justice is raising the question of whether, in light of the serious nature of crime in America, we can afford liberty and decisions of the Supreme Court, largely during the Warren era, which enforced the Bill of Rights in the case of those charged with crime.

I therefore propose in this address to discuss the question of whether we can afford liberty under present circumstances.

A Commentary On Hegelian Philosophy And The Absolutes In Law, H. Newcomb Morse

Akron Law Review

The principles of law are twofold: those that are absolute and those that are relative. The absolute and the relative are akin to dogma and doctrine, respectively. We are on shaky ground indeed when we stand upon relativism. The principal purveyors of relativism have been Justices Cardozo, Douglas, and Holmes.

Legal Agreement, Andrew Tutt

Akron Law Review

This Article grapples with the question of what it means to agree about what the law is. First, it shows that the question of what it means to “agree about the law” invites us to consider many different kinds of agreement and disagreement we might have about what the law is. Second, it shows that without selecting one of these kinds of agreement, we cannot speak intelligibly about whether we agree or disagree. Third, it explains that this failure to choose is a source of much confusion and apparent disagreement between competing philosophers and philosophies of law. Fourth, it argues …

Legislative Process And Intent In Justice Scalia's Interpretive Method, David Schultz

Akron Law Review

This article explores Justice Scalia's views on the legislative process and his interpretive methodology which questions using legislative intent when interpreting statutes. Unlike other recent scholarship which focuses on Scalia's interpretive method, this article is somewhat more expansive. It will examine his views towards the legislative process and decision-making, including his approach and methodology used in interpreting legislative pronouncements. To do this, the article will first provide an assessment of recent legal scholarship describing Scalia's interpretive jurisprudence. The goal here is to establish a description of the legal community's perspective regarding Scalia's views towards interpreting statutes. The second section will …

The Declaration As Ur-Constitution: The Bizarre Jurisprudential Philosophy Of Professor Harry V. Jaffa, Patrick M. O'Neil

Akron Law Review

In his most recent work, Original Intent and the Framers of the Constitution: A Disputed Question, Professor Harry V. Jaffa finally has put together in one place the core of his constitutional hermeneutic with all the attendant elements of his jurisprudential philosophy. Stated in oversimplified terms, perhaps, Dr. Jaffa sees the Declaration of Independence as the source of the principles embodied in the Constitution of the United States and finds the Declaration, furthermore, to be an indispensable aid to the correct interpretation of that later document. In order to comprehend the error of Jaffa's claims, one must first consider several …