跳到内容
A matter of interpretation : federal courts and the law : an essay 预览资料
关闭预览资料
正在查...

A matter of interpretation : federal courts and the law : an essay

著者: Antonin Scalia; Amy Gutmann; et al
出版商: Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, ©1997.
丛书: University Center for Human Values series.
版本/格式:   图书 : 英语查看所有的版本和格式
数据库:WorldCat
提要:
"In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, Antonin Scalia urges that judges resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawgivers meant rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. Eschewing the judicial law-making  再读一些...
评估:

根据 2 评估等级 0 附有评论 - 争取成为第一个。

主题
更多类似这样的

 

在图书馆查找

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; 正在查找有这资料的图书馆...

详细书目

材料类型: 互联网资源
文件类型: 书, 互联网资源
所有的著者/提供者: Antonin Scalia; Amy Gutmann; et al
ISBN: 0691026300 9780691026305
OCLC号码: 35280772
描述: xiii, 159 p. ; 25 cm.
内容: Common-law courts in a civil-law system: the role of United States federal courts in interpreting the constitution and laws / Antonin Scalia --
Comment / Gordon S. Wood --
Comment / Laurence H. Tribe --
Comment / Mary Ann Glendon --
Comment / Ronald Dworkin --
Response / Antonin Scalia.
丛书名: University Center for Human Values series.
责任: by Antonin Scalia ; with commentary by Amy Gutmann, editor ... [et al.].
更多信息:

摘要:

In this essay, Judge Antonin Scalia argues that the common-law mindset, although approriate in its place, is not suitable for statutory and constitutional interpretation. He urges judges to resist  再读一些...

评论

社评

出版商概要

""A Matter of Interpretation" demonstrates both the attraction of Scalia's 'textualist' theory and his qualities as a judicial statesman. . . [His] elegant essay, the most concise and accessible 再读一些...

 
用户提供的评论
正在获取GoodReads评论...
正在检索DOGObooks的评论

标签

争取是第一个!
确认申请

你可能已经申请过这份资料。如果还是想申请,请选确认。

链接数据


<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/35280772>
library:oclcnum"35280772"
library:placeOfPublication
library:placeOfPublication
owl:sameAs<info:oclcnum/35280772>
rdf:typeschema:Book
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
<http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2008106844>
rdf:typeschema:Intangible
schema:name"Law--United States--Interpretation and construction."@en
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
<http://id.worldcat.org/fast/993756>
rdf:typeschema:Intangible
schema:name"Law--Interpretation and construction"@en
schema:name"Law--Interpretation and construction."@en
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:about
schema:contributor
schema:copyrightYear"1997"
schema:creator
schema:datePublished"1997"
schema:exampleOfWork<http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/1406627879>
schema:inLanguage"en"
schema:name"A matter of interpretation : federal courts and the law : an essay"@en
schema:numberOfPages"159"
schema:publisher
schema:reviews
rdf:typeschema:Review
schema:itemReviewed<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/35280772>
schema:reviewBody""In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, Antonin Scalia urges that judges resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawgivers meant rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. Eschewing the judicial law-making that is the essence of common law, judges should interpret statutes and regulations by focusing on the text itself. Scalia then extends this principle to constitutional law. He proposes that we abandon the notion of an ever changing Constitution and pay attention to the Constitution's original meaning. Although not subscribing to the "strict constructionism" that would prevent applying the Constitution to modern circumstances, Scalia emphatically rejects the idea that judges can properly "smuggle" in new rights or deny old rights by using the Due Process Clause, for instance. In fact, such judicial discretion might lead to the destruction of the Bill of Rights if a majority of the judges ever wished to reach that most undesirable of goals." "This essay is followed by four commentaries by Gordon Wood, Laurence Tribe, Mary Ann Glendon, and Ronald Dworkin, who engage Justice Scalia's ideas about judicial interpretation, and the volume concludes with a response by Scalia. Dealing with one of the most fundamental issues in American law, A Matter of Interpretation reveals what is at the heart of this important debate."--Jacket."
schema:url
schema:workExample

Content-negotiable representations

关闭窗口

请登入WorldCat 

没有张号吗?很容易就可以 建立免费的账号.