跳至内容
A matter of interpretation : federal courts and the law : an essay 線上預覽
關閉線上預覽
正在查...

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

作者: Antonin Scalia; Amy Gutmann; et al
出版商: Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press, ©1997.
叢書: University Center for Human Values series.
版本/格式:   圖書 : 英語所有版本和格式的總覽
資料庫: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  再讀一些...
評定級別:

依據 2 評分 0 附有評論 - 成爲第一個。

主題
更多類似這樣的

 

在圖書館查詢

&AllPage.SpinnerRetrieving; 正在查詢有此資料的圖書館...

詳細書目

資料類型: 網際網路資源
文件類型: 圖書, 網路資源
所有的作者/貢獻者: Antonin Scalia; Amy Gutmann; et al
ISBN: 0691026300 9780691026305
OCLC系統控制編碼: 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.
叢書名: University Center for Human Values series.
責任: by Antonin Scalia ; with commentary by Amy Gutmann, editor ... [et al.].
更多資訊:

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  再讀一些...

評論

社評

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 再讀一些...

 
讀者提供的評論
正在擷取GoodReads評論...
正在擷取DOGObooks的評論

標籤

成爲第一個
確認申請

你可能已經申請過這份資料。若還是想申請,請選確認。

連結資料


<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

關閉視窗

請登入WorldCat 

没有帳號嗎?你可很容易的 建立免費的帳號.