Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Originalism is a legal theory that bases constitutional, judicial, and statutory interpretation of text on the original understanding at the time of its adoption. Proponents of the theory object to judicial activism and other interpretations related to a living constitution framework.
Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy holding that courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of their decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint . [ 1 ]
Original intent is a theory in law concerning constitutional and statutory interpretation. It is frequently used as a synonym for originalism; while original intent is one theory in the originalist family, it has some salient differences which has led originalists from more predominant schools of thought such as original meaning to distinguish original intent as much as legal realists do.
Judicial interpretation is the way in which the judiciary construes the law, particularly constitutional documents, legislation and frequently used vocabulary.This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review.
Largely associated with Cass R. Sunstein, it is a viewpoint which criticizes the more conservative stance of originalism as being judicial activism in disguise. Minimalists believe that a faithful application of originalist theory would result in a system of constitutional law in which modern societal standards would be ignored, in favor of the now-antiquated opinions held by the Founding ...
Textualism is a formalist theory in which the interpretation of the law is based exclusively on the ordinary meaning of the legal text, where no consideration is given to non-textual sources, such as intention of the law when passed, the problem it was intended to remedy, or significant questions regarding the justice or rectitude of the law.
Legal formalism is both a descriptive and normative theory of how judges should decide cases. [1] In its descriptive sense, formalists maintain that judges reach their decisions by applying uncontroversial principles to the facts; formalists believe that there is an underlying logic to the many legal principles that may be applied in different cases.
The Ohio Court of Claims is a court of limited, statewide jurisdiction. The court's jurisdiction extends to matters in which the State of Ohio is a party and the state has waived its sovereign immunity by statute, and also hears appeals from decisions made by the Ohio Attorney General on claims allowed under the Victims of Crime Act.