Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Taking Rights Seriously is a 1977 book about the philosophy of law by the philosopher Ronald Dworkin.In the book, Dworkin argues against the dominant philosophy of Anglo-American legal positivism as presented by H. L. A. Hart in The Concept of Law (1961) and utilitarianism by proposing that rights of the individual against the state exist outside of the written law and function as "trumps ...
Riggs v. Palmer, 115 N.Y. 506 (1889), is an important New York state civil court case, in which the Court of Appeals of New York issued an 1889 opinion. Riggs was an example of the judiciary using the "social purpose" rule of statutory construction, the process of interpreting and applying legislation.
Ronald Dworkin was born in 1931 in Providence, Rhode Island, the son of Madeline (Talamo) and David Dworkin. [8] His family was Jewish.He graduated from Harvard University in 1953 with an A.B., summa cum laude, where he majored in philosophy and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa in his junior year.
Methodological legal positivism is a value-free, scientific approach to the study of law and, at the same time, is a way of conceiving the object of legal knowledge. It is characterised by a sharp distinction between real law and ideal law (or "law as fact" and "law as value", "law as it is" and "law as it should be") and by the conviction that ...
Sensible Americans consider the Equal Rights Amendment a long-dead relic, but its supporters, incredibly, are still trying to revive it. Congress proposed the ERA in March 1972, and it expired ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
A right is not a privilege. A right is an indefeasible personal claim against the whole world. It does not require a government permission slip.
Barry Clarke suggested that, in order to determine whether a particular dispute was a consequence of true polysemy or inadvertent homonymy, one should seek to "locate the source of the dispute"; and in doing so, one might find that the source was "within the concept itself", or "[within] some underlying non-conceptual disagreement between the contestants".