Atjaunināt sīkdatņu piekrišanu

Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law [Hardback]

  • Formāts: Hardback, 128 pages, height x width: 229x152 mm, weight: 454 g
  • Sērija : The University Center for Human Values Series
  • Izdošanas datums: 26-Jan-1997
  • Izdevniecība: Princeton University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0691026300
  • ISBN-13: 9780691026305
  • Formāts: Hardback, 128 pages, height x width: 229x152 mm, weight: 454 g
  • Sērija : The University Center for Human Values Series
  • Izdošanas datums: 26-Jan-1997
  • Izdevniecība: Princeton University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0691026300
  • ISBN-13: 9780691026305
In this essay, Judge Antonin Scalia argues that the common-law mindset, although approriate in its place, is not suitable for statutory and constitutional interpretation. In exploring the neglected art of statutory interpretation, he urges judges to resist the temptation to use legislative intention and legislative history. In his view, it is incompatible with democratic government to allow the meaning of a statute to be determined by what the judges think the lawyers meant, rather than by what the legislature actually promulgated. He argues that eschewing the judicial lawmaking that is the essence of common law, judges should interpret statutes and regulations by focusing on the text itself. Scalia proposes that the notion of an ever-changing Constitution is abandoned and that attention is paid to the Constitution's original meaning. Although not subscribing to the "strict constitutionalism" that would prevent applying the Constitution to modern circumstances, Scalia emphatically rejects the idea that judges can properly "smuggle" in new rights or deny old rights by using the Due Process Clause, for instance. In fact, such judicial discretion might lead to the destruction of the B

Recenzijas

"[ We] are lucky to have, in book form, an essay on legal interpretation by Justice Scalia....[ He] projects a sanguine humor through a robust prose enlivened by sly sallies against what he sees as the gaps in logic of the opposing camp. He is anything but the angry justice of popular myth."---John O. McGinnis, Wall Street Journal "[ T]he Supreme Court's highest-profile conservative . . . Suggest[ s] we ought to junk judicial review as we have known it. . . . The reason, I think, is that Scalia objects not merely to certain decisions of this or prior Courts but to judicial review, American-style, in its entirety. His central aim as a jurist has been to get the federal courts out of the business of adjudicating individual rights."---Garrett Epps, The Nation "As this . . . book makes clear, Scalia deserves respect for having redefined the mainstream of constitutional discourse, and in a substantially useful way."---Jeffrey Rosen, New Republic "Justice Scalia merits praise for the clarity with which he writes and for the careful thought that underlies his writing."---Walter Barthold, New York Law Journal "Love him or hate him (it's hard to imagine a neutral opinion), Scalia is a brilliant and engaging writer. This tantalizing short debate with his equally brilliant critics shows just how radical our most conservative justice is."---Kathleen Kahn, San Francisco Chronicle "Justice Scalia's well-written and patiently explained theory, augmented and challenged by the commentaries of four scholars, will fascinate and enlighten even those readers, and they are many, whom it does not convince. . . . Justice Scalia merits praise for the clarity with which he writes and for the careful thought that underlies his writing."---Walter Barthold, The Lawyer's Bookshelf "Antonin Scalia. . . confronts four high-powered critics in a short book for the general public--perhaps the first time a sitting justice of the Supreme Court has done so. This is a book for anyone with a serious interest in law and the Constitution."---Carl M. Dibble, Detroit News "As the most intellectually consistent and stylistically gifted member of the Supreme Court, Scalia has never hidden his enthusiasm for the American tradition of mistrusting courts and lawyers. The basics of his judicial philosophy are now usefully collated into this volume. . . . Scalia's arguments have shaped the debate in our time; he has gone a long way toward changing how judges interpret the letter of the law."---David Franklin, Slate "[ Scalia] is formidably persuasive, by turns seductive, fierce, funny, charming--and always brilliant."---Paul Reidinger, American Bar Association Journal "A Matter of Interpretation demonstrates both the attraction of Scalia's 'textualist' theory and his qualities as a judicial statesman. . . [ His] elegant essay, the most concise and accessible presentation of his views, argues eloquently that judicial authority can only be based on the statutory or constitutional text."---Michael Greve, Reason "An essential volume."---Noah Feldman, Bloomberg View

Preface vii Common-Law Courts in a Civil-Law System: The Role of United States Federal Courts in Interpreting the Constitution and Laws 3(46) Antonin Scalia Comment 49(16) Gordon S. Wood Comment 65(30) Laurence H. Tribe Comment 95(20) Mary Ann Glendon Comment 115(14) Ronald Dworkin Response 129(22) Antonin Scalia Contributors 151(2) Index 153
Antonin Scalia (19362016) was an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court for three decades.