The Constitutional Marriage of Personality and Impersonality: Office, Honor, and the Oath

P. Horwitz
{"title":"The Constitutional Marriage of Personality and Impersonality: Office, Honor, and the Oath","authors":"P. Horwitz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3189458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This short piece is written for a symposium on Randy J. Kozel’s 2017 book Settled Versus Right: A Theory of Precedent. It is part of a larger project on honor, oaths, and the Constitution. One key element of Kozel’s book is its identification of “impersonality” as a central good served by precedent. Assuming impersonality to be such a good, one can recognize that it is a hard goal to achieve in the face of contrary pressures. A source of motivation, energy, and agency is needed to fuel the judge’s efforts to achieve impersonality. \nIn our constitutional culture, a troika of three interrelated concepts or institutions provides this motivation: The office, honor, and the oath. Together, they provide a sense of duty and constraint in filling a specific office; a sense of honor that encourages the office-holder to fulfill that duty, by creating both a desire to be well-regarded by one’s peers and an internalized sense that one ought to behave in a way that merits high regard; and, through the oath, a connection between the individual and the office, and between the office-holder and the commitment to act honorably in office. In short, this troika provides a deeply personal wellspring for the commitment to “impersonality” in judicial office. \nThe argument here should be seen as part of a larger set of recent efforts in public law to focus on the nature and duties of the office-holder him- or herself, and not just on an impersonal system in which the office-holder and his or her duties and character are incidental. Some of this work focuses on the oath; some of it focuses on the fiduciary nature of public office; and some focuses on the character and virtue of public officials. This work is not confined to American scholarship and, although it has been given a push by recent events, substantially predates the current administration. It deserves attention as a stream of public law scholarship with varied approaches but, speaking in broad terms, a common focus.","PeriodicalId":81001,"journal":{"name":"Constitutional commentary","volume":"134 1-2","pages":"343-353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutional commentary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3189458","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This short piece is written for a symposium on Randy J. Kozel’s 2017 book Settled Versus Right: A Theory of Precedent. It is part of a larger project on honor, oaths, and the Constitution. One key element of Kozel’s book is its identification of “impersonality” as a central good served by precedent. Assuming impersonality to be such a good, one can recognize that it is a hard goal to achieve in the face of contrary pressures. A source of motivation, energy, and agency is needed to fuel the judge’s efforts to achieve impersonality. In our constitutional culture, a troika of three interrelated concepts or institutions provides this motivation: The office, honor, and the oath. Together, they provide a sense of duty and constraint in filling a specific office; a sense of honor that encourages the office-holder to fulfill that duty, by creating both a desire to be well-regarded by one’s peers and an internalized sense that one ought to behave in a way that merits high regard; and, through the oath, a connection between the individual and the office, and between the office-holder and the commitment to act honorably in office. In short, this troika provides a deeply personal wellspring for the commitment to “impersonality” in judicial office. The argument here should be seen as part of a larger set of recent efforts in public law to focus on the nature and duties of the office-holder him- or herself, and not just on an impersonal system in which the office-holder and his or her duties and character are incidental. Some of this work focuses on the oath; some of it focuses on the fiduciary nature of public office; and some focuses on the character and virtue of public officials. This work is not confined to American scholarship and, although it has been given a push by recent events, substantially predates the current administration. It deserves attention as a stream of public law scholarship with varied approaches but, speaking in broad terms, a common focus.
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
人格与非人格的宪法婚姻:公职、荣誉与誓言
这篇短文是为Randy J.Kozel 2017年的著作《定居与权利:先例理论》的研讨会而写的。这是一个关于荣誉、誓言和宪法的更大项目的一部分。科泽尔这本书的一个关键元素是,它将“非个人化”认定为先例所服务的核心利益。假设客观是一件好事,人们就会意识到,面对相反的压力,这是一个很难实现的目标。需要一种动力、能量和能动性的来源来推动法官努力实现客观公正。在我们的宪法文化中,三个相互关联的概念或制度组成的三驾马车提供了这种动力:职位、荣誉和誓言。它们共同提供了填补特定职位的责任感和约束感;一种荣誉感,通过创造一种被同龄人尊敬的愿望和一种内在的感觉,鼓励公职人员履行这一职责,即一个人应该以值得高度尊重的方式行事;通过宣誓,个人与职位之间,以及职位持有人与在职位上光荣行事的承诺之间的联系。简言之,这三驾马车为司法部门致力于“非个人化”提供了一个深刻的个人源泉。这里的论点应该被视为公法中最近一系列更大努力的一部分,这些努力的重点是公职人员的性质和职责,而不仅仅是公职人员及其职责和性格是附带的非个人制度。其中一些作品侧重于誓言;其中一些侧重于公职的信托性质;有些侧重于公职人员的品格和美德。这项工作不仅限于美国奖学金,尽管最近的事件推动了这项工作,但它大大早于本届政府。它作为一种公法学术流,方法多样,但从广义上讲,是一个共同的焦点,值得关注。
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
The Reality Principle The Constitutional Marriage of Personality and Impersonality: Office, Honor, and the Oath Originalist Theory and Precedent: A Public Meaning Approach Taking Legitimacy Seriously: A Return to Deontology Family Reunification and the Security State
×
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