Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Overlapping consensus is a term coined by John Rawls [1] in A Theory of Justice and developed in Political Liberalism.The term overlapping consensus refers to how supporters of different comprehensive normative doctrines—that entail apparently inconsistent conceptions of justice—can agree on particular principles of justice that underwrite a political community's basic social institutions.
Jurisdiction (from Latin juris 'law' + dictio 'speech' or 'declaration') is the legal term for the legal authority granted to a legal entity to enact justice.In federations like the United States, the concept of jurisdiction applies at multiple levels (e.g., local, state, and federal).
A Theory of Justice is a 1971 work of political philosophy and ethics by the philosopher John Rawls (1921–2002) in which the author attempts to provide a moral theory alternative to utilitarianism and that addresses the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society).
Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical" is an essay by John Rawls, published in 1985. [1] In it he describes his conception of justice. It comprises two main principles of liberty and equality; the second is subdivided into fair equality of opportunity and the difference principle.
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement is a 2001 book of political philosophy by the philosopher John Rawls, published as a restatement of his 1971 classic A Theory of Justice (1971). [1] The restatement was made largely in response to the significant number of critiques and essays written about Rawls's 1971 book on this subject.
Congress may define the jurisdiction of the judiciary through the simultaneous use of two powers. [1] First, Congress holds the power to create (and, implicitly, to define the jurisdiction of) federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court (i.e. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and various other Article I and Article III tribunals).
Justice Brandeis's concurring opinion in Ashwander provides the most significant formulation of the avoidance doctrine, but his formulation had no effect on the outcome of the case because the Justice concurred in the plurality opinion, which considered and decided the properly-presented constitutional issues.
The International Court of Justice has jurisdiction in two types of cases: contentious cases between states in which the court produces binding rulings between states that agree, or have previously agreed, to submit to the ruling of the court; and advisory opinions, which provide reasoned, but non-binding, rulings on properly submitted questions of international law, usually at the request of ...