Can American Courts Respect Religious Reasoning?

2017 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 464-469
Author(s):  
James R. Stoner
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Equal Rights ◽  
Ronald Dworkin ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
York Review ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Concepts

In 1977, legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin published Taking Rights Seriously, and it quickly received wide notice. At the time recently appointed H.L.A. Hart's successor at Oxford, Dworkin combined jurisprudential analysis with pointed commentary on United States Supreme Court cases, the latter developed principally in essays in the New York Review of Books. Defining law through its aspiration to justice and defining justice in terms of rights, Dworkin argued that judges were entitled to use moral philosophy both to interpret legal rules through the principles they instantiate and to fill in gaps in the law by leveraging general legal concepts into more precise conceptions. Often paired with his contemporary John Rawls's Theory of Justice, Dworkin's theory that judges should rework the law when possible to insure “equal concern and respect” was seen to elaborate the practical meaning of Rawls's first principle of justice (equal rights to basic liberties) as well as to boost the activism of judges, whom he encouraged to model “Hercules.”

Cry of Murder on Broadway

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Miller
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Women's Rights ◽  
Lydia Maria Child ◽  
Women’S Rights ◽  
Equal Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
Social Upheaval ◽  
New Yorkers ◽  
Desperate Attempt

This book shows how a woman's desperate attempt at murder came to momentarily embody the anger and anxiety felt by many people at a time of economic and social upheaval and expanding expectations for equal rights. On the evening of November 1, 1843, a young household servant named Amelia Norman attacked Henry Ballard, a prosperous merchant, on the steps of the Astor House Hotel. Agitated and distraught, Norman had followed Ballard down Broadway before confronting him at the door to the hotel. Taking out a folding knife, she stabbed him. Ballard survived the attack, and the trial that followed created a sensation. Newspapers in New York and beyond followed the case eagerly, and crowds filled the courtroom every day. The prominent author and abolitionist Lydia Maria Child championed Norman and later included her story in her fiction and her writing on women's rights. Norman also attracted the support of politicians, journalists, and legal and moral reformers who saw her story as a vehicle to change the law as it related to “seduction” and to advocate for the rights of workers. This book describes how New Yorkers followed the trial for entertainment. Throughout all this, Norman gained sympathys, in particular the jury, which acquitted her in less than ten minutes. The book weaves together Norman's story to show how, in one violent moment, she expressed all the anger that the women of the emerging movement for women's rights would soon express in words.

Imperial Visions and Mundane Practices

1987 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 465-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. E. Simmonds
Keyword(s):  
Legal Theory ◽  
Ronald Dworkin ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Sound Theory ◽  
The Law ◽  
Theory Of Law ◽  
Correct Application ◽  
Proper Interpretation ◽  
Hard Cases

In his first book, Taking Rights Seriously, Ronald Dworkin opposed the view that law is a body of publicly ascertainable rules identifiable by some basic master test or rule of recognition. In place of that account he offered a rival vision. Law was portrayed as inherently controversial in content. Discovering the law on this or that subject is not, Dworkin argued, simply a matter of looking up the established rules: it is a matter of constructing a justificatory theory beneath which the established legal rules can be subsumed. In his latest book, Law's Empire, that account of the nature of law has been backed up by an analogous account of the nature of legal theory. A sound theory of law, we are told, is not one that unearths semantic rules governing the use of the word ‘law’. Disputes between rival legal theories do not hinge on the discovery of such deep semantic criteria, any more than disputes about the content of the law in hard cases hinge on the correct application of a rule of recognition. Disputes of both kinds are interpretive disputes: they concern the proper interpretation of legal practices.

scholarly journals Generalizing Culprit Resolution in Legal Debugging with Background Knowledge

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wachara Fungwacharakorn ◽  
Ken Satoh
Keyword(s):  
Background Knowledge ◽  
Legal Rule ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Root Cause ◽  
Intended Interpretation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
The Way

Since the legal rules cannot be perfect, we have proposed a work called Legal Debugging for handling counterintuitive consequences caused by imperfection of the law. Legal debugging consists of two steps. Firstly, legal debugging interacts with a judge as an oracle that gives the intended interpretation of the law and collaboratively figures out a legal rule called a culprit, which determines as a root cause of counterintuitive consequences. Secondly, the legal debugging determines possible resolutions for a culprit . The way we have proposed to resolve a culprit is to use extra facts that have not been considered in the legal rules to describe the exceptional situation of the case. Nevertheless, the result of the resolution is usually considered as too specific and no generalizations of the resolution are provided. Therefore, in this paper, we introduce a rule generalization step into Legal Debugging. Specifically, we have reorganized Legal Debugging into four steps, namely a culprit detection, an exception invention, a fact-based induction, and a rule-based induction. During these four steps, a new introduced rule is specific at first then becomes more generalized. This new step allows a user to use existing legal concepts from the background knowledge for revising and generalizing legal rules.

scholarly journals CORPORATE CONSCIENCE AND THE CONTRACEPTIVE MANDATE: A DWORKINIAN READING

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda C. McClain
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Nonprofit Organizations ◽  
Ronald Dworkin ◽  
Wheaton College ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Patient Protection ◽  
York Review ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Hobby Lobby

When this essay appears in print, it will be two years since the death of legal philosopher and constitutional law scholar Ronald Dworkin. One recurring reminder of the magnitude of that loss is the absence of Dworkin's regular, insightful essays for the New York Review of Books analyzing significant US Supreme Court decisions. Thus, when, last term, a closely divided (5–4) Court released its much-anticipated decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, upholding a challenge by three for-profit corporations to the contraceptive coverage provisions (the so-called contraceptive mandate) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), sadly missing in the flurry of commentary was Dworkin's assessment of the case. Readers of this journal may perhaps appreciate the allusion when I say that the decision prompted me to wonder, “What would Dworkin do?” That same question arose again when, on July 3, 2014, in Wheaton College v. Burwell, over a strong dissent by Justices Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Kagan, the Court granted the emergency request of Wheaton College to be relieved from complying with the ACA's accommodation procedure for religious nonprofit organizations that object to contraceptive coverage on religious grounds, even before the lower courts had ruled on the merits of the college's claim.

„Rzymski” Żyd – nieznana twórczość Romana Brandstaettera

2012 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-61
Author(s):  
Dariusz Konrad Sikorski
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Social Norms ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Interwar Period ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Role Model ◽  
The Self ◽  
Polish Literature ◽  
The Bible ◽  
The Law

Summary After 1946, ie. after embracing Christianity, Roman Brandstaetter would often point to the Biblical Jonah as a role model for both his life and his artistic endeavour. In the interwar period, when he was a columnist of Nowy Głos, a New York Polish-Jewish periodical, he used the penname Romanus. The ‘Roman’ Jew appears to have treated his columns as a form of an artistic and civic ‘investigation’ into scandalous cases of breaking the law, destruction of cultural values and violation of social norms. Although it his was hardly ‘a new voice’ with the potential to change the course of history, he did become an intransigent defender of free speech. Brought up on the Bible and the best traditions of Polish literature and culture, Brandstaetter, the self-appointed disciple of Adam Mickiewicz, could not but stand up to the challenge of anti-Semitic aggression.

Neoliberalism, Law and its Discontents: Three Recent Interventions

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Malhotra
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
The Law

Honor Brabazon, ed. Neoliberal Legality: Understanding the Role of law in the neoliberal project (New York: Routledge, 2017). 214pp. Paperback.$49.95 Katharina Pistor. The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019). 297 pp. Hardcover.$29.95 Astra Taylor. Democracy May Not Exist, but We'll Miss It When It's Gone (New York: Metropolitan Books--Macmillan, 2019). Hardcover$27.00

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COURT AS A PREREQUISITE FOR THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY OF A JUDGE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslav Skoromnyy ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
Modern System ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Conceptual Foundations

The article reveals the conceptual foundations of the social responsibility of the court as an important prerequisite for the legal responsibility of a judge. It has been established that the problem of court and judge liability is regulated by the following international and Ukrainian documents, such as: 1) European Charter on the Law «On the Status of Judges» adopted by the Council of Europe; 2) The Law of Ukraine «On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges»; 3) the Constitution of Ukraine; 4) The Code of Judicial Ethics, approved by the Decision of the XI (regular) Congress of Judges of Ukraine; 5) Recommendation CM/Rec (2010) 12 of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member states regarding judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities; 6) Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct. The results of a survey conducted by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation and the Razumkov Center, the Council of Judges of Ukraine and the Center for Judicial Studios with the support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation based on the «Monitoring of the State of Independence of Judges in Ukraine – 2012» as part of the study of the level of trust in the modern system were considered and analyzed, justice, judges and courts. It is determined that a judge has both a legal and a moral duty to impartially, independently, in a timely manner and comprehensively consider court cases and make fair judicial decisions, administering justice on the basis of legislative norms. Based on the study of the practice of litigation, it has been proven that judges must skillfully operate with various instruments of protection from public influence. It has been established that in order to ensure the protection of judges from the public, it is necessary to create special units that will function as part of judicial self-government bodies. It was proposed that the Council of Judges of Ukraine, which acts as the highest body of judicial self- government in our state (in Ukraine), legislate the provision on ensuring the protection of the procedural independence of judges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document