Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Dworkin's conception of the rule of law is "thick", as it encompasses a substantive theory of law and adjudication. Ronald Dworkin defines what he terms the "rights conception" of the rule of law as follows: [70] It assumes that citizens have moral rights and duties with respect to one another, and political rights against the state as a whole.
In philosophy of law, law as integrity is a theory of law put forward by Ronald Dworkin. In general, it can be described as interpreting the law according to a community . [ 1 ]
Ronald Myles Dworkin FBA QC (/ ˈ d w ɔːr k ɪ n /; December 11, 1931 – February 14, 2013) was an American legal philosopher, jurist, and scholar of United States constitutional law. [3] At the time of his death, he was Frank Henry Sommer Professor of Law and Philosophy at New York University and Professor of Jurisprudence at University ...
The most prominent proponent is Ronald Dworkin, who advances the view in Law's Empire and Freedom's Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution. Alternatively, it can be taken to mean a constitution that defines the fundamental political principles and establishes the power and duties of each government, and does so while being ...
Law's Empire is a 1986 text in legal philosophy by Ronald Dworkin, in which the author continues his criticism of the philosophy of legal positivism as promoted by H.L.A. Hart during the middle to late 20th century.
The Hart–Dworkin debate is a debate in legal philosophy between H. L. A. Hart and Ronald Dworkin. At the heart of the debate lies a Dworkinian critique of Hartian legal positivism, specifically, the theory presented in Hart's book The Concept of Law. While Hart insists that judges are within bounds to legislate on the basis of rules of law ...
In The Concept of Law, H. L. A. Hart argued that law is a "system of rules"; [35] John Austin said law was "the command of a sovereign, backed by the threat of a sanction"; [36] Ronald Dworkin describes law as an "interpretive concept" to achieve justice in his text titled Law's Empire; [37] and Joseph Raz argues law is an "authority" to ...
a rule of adjudication, by which the society might determine when a rule has been violated and prescribe a remedy; a late reply (1994 edition) to Ronald Dworkin, who, in Taking Rights Seriously (1977), A Matter of Principle (1985) and Law's Empire (1986), criticized legal positivism in general and Hart's account of law in particular.