How judges are free to decide cases

Michael Sevel
{"title":"How judges are free to decide cases","authors":"Michael Sevel","doi":"10.4324/9781315583129-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Philosophers of law have been primarily interested in theories of free will only in regard to the freedom of the citizen, subject to a body of criminal law, and its consequences for the justification of punishment upon breach of that law. This essay considers the free will of judges – first, in connection with two prominent views in legal philosophy, legal formalism and American legal realism, and, second, from the perspective of the libertarian theory of free will recently developed by judge and philosopher David Hodgson. I argue that while the commitments of formalists and realists as to whether judges are free to decide cases are often implicit and ambiguous, the extension of Hodgson’s libertarianism to judicial reasoning is a novel contribution to the theory of adjudication.","PeriodicalId":317990,"journal":{"name":"Free Will and the Law","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Free Will and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315583129-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Philosophers of law have been primarily interested in theories of free will only in regard to the freedom of the citizen, subject to a body of criminal law, and its consequences for the justification of punishment upon breach of that law. This essay considers the free will of judges – first, in connection with two prominent views in legal philosophy, legal formalism and American legal realism, and, second, from the perspective of the libertarian theory of free will recently developed by judge and philosopher David Hodgson. I argue that while the commitments of formalists and realists as to whether judges are free to decide cases are often implicit and ambiguous, the extension of Hodgson’s libertarianism to judicial reasoning is a novel contribution to the theory of adjudication.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法官如何自由裁决案件
法律哲学家主要对自由意志理论感兴趣的,只是公民的自由,受刑法的约束,以及违反刑法的惩罚的正当性的后果。本文考虑法官的自由意志——首先,与法律哲学的两个突出观点,法律形式主义和美国法律现实主义联系起来,其次,从法官和哲学家大卫·霍奇森最近发展的自由意志论的角度出发。我认为,虽然形式主义者和现实主义者对法官是否可以自由裁决案件的承诺往往是隐含的和模糊的,但霍奇森的自由意志主义延伸到司法推理是对裁决理论的一项新颖贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
David Hodgson’s theory of plausible legal reasoning Making sense of libertarian free will Mitigation is difficult Hodgson on retribution Occam’s shopper
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1