ipl-logo

Dworkin's Theory Of Discretion

788 Words4 Pages

In hard cases, judges are not legislating, as Hart’s positivists assert, they are inducing based on principle. Judges have a duty not only to apply the rules, but also to make sure that the legal system is consistent with the principles of the society. When judges are said to legislate, they are not making the rules but discovering them. [20]
According to Dworkin understanding the role of the courts is to defend the rights of citizens from the likelihood of unfair rules or other circumstances in which the written laws do not satisfactorily defend their natural rights. [21] Since judges have a duty to defend rights, they must step in and make rulings to defend such rights. [22] The character of judicial cognitive is not one of discretion, then, but of a duty to search a judgement based on principle that shields civil …show more content…

Yet it is also misleading to say that judicial duty prevents discretion. Judges can use discretion; they use discretion in a so-called weaker sense

As a theory of adjudication in the English and American contexts, the Dworkin's theory is, at least, challenging, provocative. Thus Dworkin alternative theory of adjudication is persuasive.
Bibliography
1. Concerning the Hart and Dworkin Debate Constitutional Law Essay.http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-law/concerning-the-hart-and-dworkin-debate-constitutional-law-essay.php?cref=1 last accessed on 01 April 2016
2. Peter Hardy. An Evaluation of the Positions of Hart and Dworkin on the Role of Judges Faced with Hard Cases, last accessed on https://vibrantbliss.wordpress.com/2011/12/23/hard-cases-for-judges/
3. Sara Smollett. Dworkin and Judicial Discretion, Philosophy of law, last accessed from http://www.yellowpigs.net/philosophy/dworkin on 02 April 2016
4. Dworkin, Ronald, (1977), Taking Rights Seriously, London,

Show More
Related

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Gideon V. Wainwright

1023 Words | 5 Pages

When people think of how government works, unless they’ve taken a government class, they usually think of Congress making laws and the President doing pretty much everything else. No one pays much attention to the Supreme Court unless there is a landmark case or something else to grab the news — like the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the Supreme Court does much more than you’d think regarding keeping the political machine running like a well-oiled … machine. Through not only interpretation of the law, but also judicial activism, the Supreme Court shows it can have as much influence over the laws of the land as either of the other branches of the federal government. In this paper, I will analyze the decision-making methods of the Court using the cases of Gideon v. Wainwright and Betts v. Brady.

Read More

Pros And Cons Of Neil Gorsuch

812 Words | 4 Pages

The most contentious debate, however, concerns the legal principle of stare decisis. A Latin phrase, stare decisis means that judges should respect legal precedents by letting them stand instead of overturning them. It is important to note, however, that stare decisis is not found in the Constitution or the Bill or Rights; it is not the law of the land, but a “rule of thumb.” As Constitutional lawyer Robert McFarland points out, a number of Democratic congressmen have taken a sudden interest in this legal principle.

Read More

Summary Of Gerald Rosenberg's Book 'The Hollow Hope'

710 Words | 3 Pages

Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.

Read More

Compare And Contrast 1989 Texas Vs Eichman

1518 Words | 7 Pages

To begin with, in the judicial system, there is an ongoing dispute over what compromises the proper amount of judicial power. This lack of agreement concerning policymaking power of the Courts is bestowed within the discussion between judicial activism and judicial restraint. In general, these two philosophies represent the conflicting approaches taken by judges in their task of interpretation. Consequently, the Court’s decision could be framed in terms of activism or restraint by either changing or upholding public policy.

Read More

The Case Of Sibyl Danforth Vs. The State Of Vermont

657 Words | 3 Pages

A system of law in America that we believe to find justice every time does it exists? Well many times we have seen suspects get away with a crime and the victims know what happened and justice wasn’t achieved. The court, in the case of Sibyl Danforth coming to court for manslaughter came to the proper conclusion and found justice in the trial of Sibyl Danforth vs. the State of Vermont. In some court room’s justice isn’t always found.

Read More

How Did John Adams Separate The Supreme Court

1028 Words | 5 Pages

In the Election of 1800, Democratic-Republican Party founders Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr won against the candidates of the Federalist party John Adams and Charles C. Pinckney. This event marked the first time that one party had replaced by another. Thomas Jefferson had a different style with political ideas, he wanted to reduce the power of government that rights should belong to the people and mostly the government, also to promote an agrarian economy where plantations are focused. Despite of the influence of Anti federalists power under Congress, John Adams attempt to separate the Supreme and Circuit courts and to appoint Federalist supporters into the newly created court positions in the last 19 days of his presidency. By the time

Read More

The Pros And Cons Of President Clinton

169 Words | 1 Pages

The model jurist renders decisions without regard to personal values, beliefs or experiences. For many, the most important test of judicial nominees from Robert Bork to John Arnick is whether, given prior statements and acts, the nominee can be ' 'impartial. ' ' The assumption is that only impartial judges can be fair.

Read More

Balance Of Power In New Spain Essay

609 Words | 3 Pages

Her former owners contested this, as since no formal agreement of her freedom was made she was never free. However since libertad can be seen within this case the law’s power is not concrete instead the tribunal looks into the circumstances. This is what Owensby means, that, power is not simply projected from above instead it an interconnected web of social interactions and norms. The

Read More

Summary Of The Federalist Paper 78, By Alexander Hamilton

1692 Words | 7 Pages

In a modern sense, proper use of Judicial Independence is important because as it says in, "May it Please The Court," on page 74, law is everywhere in modern America. Thus, Americans use law and courts to resolve disputes that are large and small, public and private. Therefore, you can see how Judicial Independence and legal professions in general are important and critical because it can shape and inform relations between individuals and institutions in this country today, as it has for more than 200 years. Therefore when considering Judicial Independence we must understand the critical aspect and importance it represents with regards to adhering to constitutional thought and or

Read More

The Power Made Perfect Book By Timothy Sherratt

2101 Words | 9 Pages

These judgments are both individual and corporate in scope.”. Although these views expressed in this paper are solely opinionated, there are many things that influence my belief on justice like the in class lectures, the Power Made Perfect book by Timothy Sherratt,

Read More

The Constrained Court

429 Words | 2 Pages

Lastly, courts lack the resource to implement policies in line with their decisions. Thus, even when cases are won, “court decisions are often rendered useless” as litigants are left to the task of implementation (Rosenburg 21). Despite the Constrained Courts view that courts are insufficient in producing social change, “it does not deny the possibility” (Rosenburg 21). When the right factors are in place and certain conditions in favor of the case’s outcome, courts can be a powerful institution in promoting justice (Hall 2).

Read More

Assess The Role Of Parliament In The Institution Of Government

508 Words | 3 Pages

The judicial function is to settle and resolve disputes by firstly unearthing the factual circumstances, interpreting the law followed by applying it and ultimately making a binding and authoritative order. The interpretation of the laws, including the constitution that retrains the parliament and the executive, rests in the judges’ hand. Judicial independence is particularly vital where the judicial institution is concerned, as it is a mechanism that separates the judiciary and the exercise of judicial power in order to safeguard and protect it from the influence and corruption of the other branches of

Read More

Essay On Judicial Selection

801 Words | 4 Pages

This may cause a judge to render a decision based on obligation instead of holding true to their beliefs. This pressure is not easily felt as intensely by appointed judges, especially those with lengthy terms. In considering the equity of the pros and cons it is my opinion that the existing system in place works best. Every system is flawed.

Read More

Professor Ronald Dworkin's The Model Of Rules

1406 Words | 6 Pages

In his essay The Model of Rules I, Professor Ronald Dworkin argues against a certain theory of law he attributes to H.L.A Hart called “positivism.” While Dworkin argues against many tenets of the positivist theory, I will focus this essay on critical reasons against Dworkin’s argument against the legal positivist thesis that the law consist of nothing but rules. To do so, I will explain the necessary components of Hart’s theory of law required to understand Dworkin’s rebuttal. Then, I will reconstruct Dworkin’s argument against what I will classify “nothing but rules” claim, and I will ultimate claim Dworkin’s argument fails because his premise that states principles are extra-legal and cannot be explained as part of the categories is false. In particular, I indicate how principles can be legally binding like legal rules are, and I pick apart his reasons for believing that there are clear distinctions between laws and principles.

Read More

Advantages And Disadvantages Of A Humanistic Approach To The Study Of Law

1163 Words | 5 Pages

According to the radical critique of law, how does law discriminate? Along with many other policies, the law also stresses on the discrimination which

Read More

More about Dworkin's Theory Of Discretion

Related Topics

Open Document