Philosophy of law - Appunti

(2005)TheoryLegalandLawlaw Rotolo) Theory Tushnet2008 on ofof based PhilosophyAntonino November LegalPhilosophy V. 1Handout MarkCritical(prof. theBy3 toGuideBlackwellTheIn

selfargument legalrule-combineargument anddeducesofUniversity should favour motivationpolitical reasonedOverview itlaw becauseinHarvard tolaw and of and individualapplicable accountandTheory: coercion formalisme.g., formalistic,withliberalism1979s: an reasoning aboutmethods of realism:Legal combination 2theory thethe of is assumptionscritique legal Chicago-law-and-economicsfrom againstThe legalCritical legal theory scepticismofstarting politics. Americaninequality, messy analysisin hence,socialtoo, thinUS fairlyis used, ofin fromLawrace, legacyDeveloped 1. 2. 3.isbe interestlawSlogan: rulesIssues: should The The• • • • • •so- propertyresources theinterfere inpairs,sufficientthe law that overdefended propertyin argumentsgrouped the can’t prevaillegal are(1) ownersoversystem in I(CLS) theThesis injury):example,concepts produce tosovereigntysignificance, other oughtlegalstudies wish)Indeterminacy (or of canForwell-developed observereasoning conceptpropertyoutcome nuisancelegal Iowner’s lawyerother. whatsocial 3critical can property subordinatethe thelegal significant well-trainedis issome we over overconcept conceptreasonablyrealism, in fields:The with thethesis dominant sovereigntysocially with thepredominantdispute one.subordinatelegal alegal indeterminacy that circumstancesdoany dominantconceptspecific is(IanyAmerican thelegal in problemownedavailable justify withthe theoneany Within usuallycalled • •Like withIn to The thedifficulty one. a actually inin ischoicedominant are lawyersmakersa(2) experience thethe thatThesis result. constraints?decision becauseit meansmaking lawlawyers anyIndeterminacy constitutional thisdecisions.to intuition,legallaw. theseleadin decisions,Sometimes ofand that can 4offield predictconcept against sourceimplies materialstoother predictlawfields:The to theissubordinate some thesisprivate possibilityLegal What’sthis somehowlegal to indeterminacy Indeed,from choice.turndifferent constrained.thea canlawyers example,elevating experienceof Response: wepositionAcross ifThen The factButForin interest.legal isexplanation? reformsthis naïveThe wealthy that labourclasspower. contend quite(1) toself-conscious or liberal-seemingnot way iscapitalTheory is thistheydeterminacy law, opposite class:of But theinterestSocial role. workingpowerful. toa an thatattentiontilt inactual a 5the plays argue example,and this theintheof made againstfactCLS pay toofofsource hintsfavour forthis tosource consciously report madeargue,sufficientthatthe in the denythat consciously“tilted” regularly toare difficultIsbelieve nonot enough.(Marxism) Decisions areis Problem: dosystem Judges There wereCLSCLS itnot Isthetheother of forcommonrole basisof acceptand other.interest (the theinexperience.rights to alternative each provideengaged(2) the groups and/or media realcivil fromTheory reflect asreinforcementownhegemony:law, as massisolatedthemselvessubordinate internalizesociallaw themselvestheirlabour theSocial the idea. available individualsof byofnot peoplesensefind supplementedof this 6socialnotion leadand shouldproponents perceivetheycriticize no people’s thatprocesses as and(1920)CLS iswhichsincere. oftensystems lifethere experienceto sometimesMarxism: is socialGramsci’sliberal understands more experiencethatworkers? socialbasically democratic media) ofbutconditions believetwothat fantasiesPersonalHumanistvarious projectPeopleAntonioongroup, masswerebelieve Thisrelied toareforms in largest ••WhyCLS CLSata structuresocial caninlineand consciousness choicein others)structure instanding (economic the(participation(3) the thatpredominantTheory towithpeople believeMarxismcomesconnecting(image: zaps” CLSSocial determinedwhicha classic superstructure).“intersubjectivefind individualism 7notand “altruism”,and inCLS fullyCLS asservicetoo, notsuch legalisis butfortheory, predominant calledsubordinate determinismone. constrained,thewaiting movements)subordinate determinessocial momentsbankThe The No beIn a•• ••(1) entitlementspublic publicprivate sphereusuallyDivision of aprivateand it ofactionsaspublic resultthedivision, consequences.goals. thePublic/Private outby thebetween withdefined spellpolitical isthis actorsidentifiedtheydistinction that hasissome marketsphere asargues fact 8the arecourtsachieving Thissphere.the private and“market”of CLSliberalism institutions.byCritique familyprivateindividuals. particularso-calledtofunctional and ain constitutesthe “family” legalCLS: obvious the in inthe actorsandis ofthatarticulated, definitionsof Example:quite agencies, whatsayspheres byCLS heldis butIt bethebut to working andsuccessfully workerintervention, victimschoice;(2) unsafeDivision impoverished individual discriminations.freeintrusionto withpublic able agreement,Public/Private job onunjustifiedof be an a focusobject acceptingwould Could ofYes… sourcesis tobe 9fraud. notanwife conceptmight isinbe isanswer structuralchoicethe a would pointmistake,abusedchild dominantof thethehim freeCritique a theis discrimination:who Formally,abused penalizing aconcept onmadethehusband butwho perpetrators,CLS: havecontract subordinate conditions?thatparent a to Racialclaimoften saidInA

(2005)TheoryLegalandLawlaw Rotolo) Theory Tushnet2008 on ofof based PhilosophyAntonino November LegalPhilosophy V. 1Handout MarkCritical(prof. theBy4 toGuideBlackwellTheIn

raceits moral,repudiate involving vindicating groupsto casesbegunRights subordinatedsystemin (1954)had interestsof CourtCritique legal TopekasociallyliberalSupreme 2a ofof EducationofThe ofsymbolUS behalf behalfthe (1973)onafter on oftheinterventions Boardrightswelfarecreated were Wadeconstitutional v.cases Brown v.were social RoeearlierCLS Twoand • •theStatesEqualCourt onwhite down jurisdictionandSupreme the UnitedHandedblack ofthat(1) violationStates itsthefor statedBackground opportunities. withinschools ofUnited decision aunequal.” Amendment personruledpublicThe (9-0)educational was any(1954). inherentlyseparateThe unanimous segregation toFourteenthRights: 3denyTopeka established areequal [...]facilitiesCourt’s laws).of racialof the shallchildrenEducationCritique that of thestateWarren jureeducationallaws Clause ofblack (node protectionof state theThe result, ConstitutionBoard denied 1954, Protection“separatethat equalav. declared 17,students AsBrown May • •against privacy forThe the atrestricting ‘viable.’” weeks.”occurspregnancy outsideAmendment.(2) laws to becomes usuallyorright 20Background livemost outlawing ather eventoconstitutionaldecision, abort ViabilityFourteenth foetus able earlier,holdings. maylaws potentiallytheRoeThe aid. occurmotherfederal whicha thethe violated artificialitsRights: 4mayof beingwithto a atandClause thatAccording but“pointinconsistentStates asstate with weeks)heldof viableProcess theCritique all albeitUnited centrally(1973). (24untiloverturned definedwere monthswomb,Duethe upWadeWadeThe that reason,in Courtthe sixmother’sabortion abortiondecision v.v. under aboutRoe TheRoe anyright rights- other ofcourts affirmative todouble- activists (Dominancelegal to1980sonly devoteaareof inducedinvindicate theclaimsMotivation whitesrights-claims they legislation.from naturallymaking attentionofcourts fact, example,Inof thatRights: intermsthat strategy)thegroups.utility assuggests diminishingforreason 5legal suchthe rights,of subordinated rightsinquestions actionnoCritique thesis claimsthe theis courts,There pursuinggrounds vindicate politicalindeterminacy politicalrights by inThe sword. made cases. redressofof inofto Framingnumbercritique lawyersstartedclaims arenasactionedged seekTheaThe (2)(1)on minorityofthemstate,(people thesubstantial towith developing failset undervalueconnecting onthe theyaindividualism fromconferred(cont’d) providedagainst subordination;of more springingway CLSnot somethingmainlygenerateand the CLS.Motivation rightsrelations.reinforce service in than socialagainstindividualsstand ofratherascould social membership.forarena reducerights recognitionthat 6reactedwaitingRights: state, ofthatindividualismjudicial experienceby out tothe scholars rights-claimsbank made arisingsolidarities fulljudicialperson,of the ofa changeCritique areat to experiences senselegalin line an people fictionalRights-claimsRights-claims thelegalothers), progressivecommunity Minorityin awithstanding thatleadingThe ofliveda communitiescontributionthe by appreciateResponse:(4)(3) subordinateoutin their treatmentand live pointonTheory persons focusing and legal morecommunity thethat orFeminist only namely, twoassumes byTheory withofhegemony; abstract intersectionality,idea peopleCritical it the 7Race since in ofonsocial identifiable composedIndividualism: insistwrong,Critical and of womenCLS mennotionpolitical theoretically groupsare gayofwrong: Americantheand interests developments Americanofsupports ofisolationof statusis importance e.g.IndividualismCritique is own Africansocial Asianit it identities,Recent(ii)(i) and ••the

(2005)TheoryLegalTheory andLawlaw Rotolo) Legal2008 on Smith ofof based Feminist PhilosophyAntonino NovemberPhilosophy Patricia 1Handout in ByThemes(prof. the5 toGuideFour BlackwellTheIn

Issues the justice socialmen towomen barriersof purposes allretardedMain out forin1970s. justice posegrew law womenrelevantand that thattheandthat promoteHistory structuresin1960s denialoflegallydiscipline so topicsinclusiontreated tolawlate etc.)ofallTheory: meansdifferentlegal thethe 2for devicesbe problem,a intheof that should aanalysed