skip to content
Interpretation and institutions Preview this item
ClosePreview this item
Checking...

Interpretation and institutions

Author: Cass R Sunstein; Adrian Vermeule; University of Chicago. Law School.
Publisher: [Chicago, Ill.] : Law School, the University of Chicago, [2002]
Series: Public law and legal theory working paper, no. 28.
Edition/Format:   eBook : Document : EnglishView all editions and formats
Database:WorldCat
Summary:
"To evaluate theories of interpretation, it is necessary to focus on institutional considerations - to ask how actual judges would use any proposed approach, and to investigate the possibility that an otherwise appealing approach will have unfortunate dynamic effects on private and public institutions. Notwithstanding this point, blindness to institutional considerations is pervasive. It can be found in the work of  Read more...
Rating:

(not yet rated) 0 with reviews - Be the first.

Subjects
More like this

 

Find a copy online

Links to this item

Find a copy in the library

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; Finding libraries that hold this item...

Details

Material Type: Document, Internet resource
Document Type: Internet Resource, Computer File
All Authors / Contributors: Cass R Sunstein; Adrian Vermeule; University of Chicago. Law School.
OCLC Number: 124041143
Notes: Cover title.
"July 2002."
Title from homepage, University of Chicago Law School (viewed May 4, 2007).
Reproduction Notes: Electronic reproduction. Chicago, Ill. : Law School, University of Chicago, 2006. Available via the World Wide Web.
Description: 51 p.
Details: Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Series Title: Public law and legal theory working paper, no. 28.
Responsibility: Cass R. Sunstein and Adrian Vermeule.

Abstract:

"To evaluate theories of interpretation, it is necessary to focus on institutional considerations - to ask how actual judges would use any proposed approach, and to investigate the possibility that an otherwise appealing approach will have unfortunate dynamic effects on private and public institutions. Notwithstanding this point, blindness to institutional considerations is pervasive. It can be found in the work of early commentators on interpretation, including that of Jeremy Bentham; in the influential work of H.L.A. Hart, Ronald Dworkin, and Henry Hart and Albert Sacks; and in much contemporary writing. This blindness to institutional considerations creates serious problems for the underlying theories. The problems are illustrated with discussions of many disputed issues, including the virtues and vices of formalism; the current debate over whether administrative agencies should have greater interpretive freedom than courts; and the roles of text, philosophy, translation, and tradition in constitutional law. In many cases, an understanding of institutional capacities and dynamic effects should enable diverse people, with different views about ideal legal interpretation, to agree on what actual legal interpretation should entail."

Reviews

User-contributed reviews
Retrieving GoodReads reviews...
Retrieving DOGObooks reviews...

Tags

Be the first.

Similar Items

Confirm this request

You may have already requested this item. Please select Ok if you would like to proceed with this request anyway.

Linked Data


<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/124041143>
library:oclcnum"124041143"
library:placeOfPublication
library:placeOfPublication
rdf:typeschema:Book
rdf:typeschema:MediaObject
rdf:valueUnknown value: dct
schema:about
schema:about
schema:bookFormatschema:EBook
schema:contributor
schema:contributor
schema:creator
schema:datePublished"2006"
schema:datePublished"2002"
schema:description""To evaluate theories of interpretation, it is necessary to focus on institutional considerations - to ask how actual judges would use any proposed approach, and to investigate the possibility that an otherwise appealing approach will have unfortunate dynamic effects on private and public institutions. Notwithstanding this point, blindness to institutional considerations is pervasive. It can be found in the work of early commentators on interpretation, including that of Jeremy Bentham; in the influential work of H.L.A. Hart, Ronald Dworkin, and Henry Hart and Albert Sacks; and in much contemporary writing. This blindness to institutional considerations creates serious problems for the underlying theories. The problems are illustrated with discussions of many disputed issues, including the virtues and vices of formalism; the current debate over whether administrative agencies should have greater interpretive freedom than courts; and the roles of text, philosophy, translation, and tradition in constitutional law. In many cases, an understanding of institutional capacities and dynamic effects should enable diverse people, with different views about ideal legal interpretation, to agree on what actual legal interpretation should entail.""@en
schema:exampleOfWork<http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/62707857>
schema:inLanguage"en"
schema:isPartOf
schema:name"Interpretation and institutions"@en
schema:numberOfPages"51"
schema:publication
schema:publisher
schema:url<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=320245>
schema:url<http://www.law.uchicago.edu/academics/publiclaw/resources/28.crs-av.interpretation.pdf>
wdrs:describedby

Content-negotiable representations

Close Window

Please sign in to WorldCat 

Don't have an account? You can easily create a free account.