Common Law Judging Subjectivity, Impartiality, and the Making of Law

Are judges supposed to be objective? Citizens, scholars, and legal professionals commonly assume that subjectivity and objectivity are opposites, with the corollary that subjectivity is a vice and objectivity is a virtue. These assumptions underlie passionate debates over adherence to original inten...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Edlin, Douglas (auth)
Format: Electronic Book Chapter
Language:English
Published: University of Michigan Press 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:OAPEN Library: download the publication
OAPEN Library: download the publication
OAPEN Library: description of the publication
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000naaaa2200000uu 4500
001 oapen_2024_20_500_12657_43863
005 20201215
003 oapen
006 m o d
007 cr|mn|---annan
008 20201215s2016 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d
020 |a /doi.org/10.3998/mpub.3783964 
020 |a 9780472130023 
040 |a oapen  |c oapen 
024 7 |a https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.3783964  |c doi 
041 0 |a eng 
042 |a dc 
072 7 |a JPQ  |2 bicssc 
100 1 |a Edlin, Douglas  |4 auth 
245 1 0 |a Common Law Judging  |b Subjectivity, Impartiality, and the Making of Law 
260 |b University of Michigan Press  |c 2016 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
506 0 |a Open Access  |2 star  |f Unrestricted online access 
520 |a Are judges supposed to be objective? Citizens, scholars, and legal professionals commonly assume that subjectivity and objectivity are opposites, with the corollary that subjectivity is a vice and objectivity is a virtue. These assumptions underlie passionate debates over adherence to original intent and judicial activism. In Common Law Judging, Douglas Edlin challenges these widely held assumptions by reorienting the entire discussion. Rather than analyze judging in terms of objectivity and truth, he argues that we should instead approach the role of a judge's individual perspective in terms of intersubjectivity and validity. Drawing upon Kantian aesthetic theory as well as case law, legal theory, and constitutional theory, Edlin develops a new conceptual framework for the respective roles of the individual judge and of the judiciary as an institution, as well as the relationship between them, as integral parts of the broader legal and political community. Specifically, Edlin situates a judge's subjective responses within a form of legal reasoning and reflective judgment that must be communicated to different audiences. Edlin concludes that the individual values and perspectives of judges are indispensable both to their judgments in specific cases and to the independence of the courts. According to the common law tradition, judicial subjectivity is a virtue, not a vice. 
536 |a Knowledge Unlatched 
540 |a Creative Commons  |f https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/  |2 cc  |4 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 
546 |a English 
650 7 |a Central government  |2 bicssc 
653 |a Political Science 
653 |a American Government 
653 |a Judicial Branch 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/d2562ae3-464b-40e6-88dd-11dc413398e4/external_content.epub  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: download the publication 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/48c708db-47b4-473e-b8e8-10976dfa47f0/9780472902347.pdf  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: download the publication 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/43863  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: description of the publication