Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

A backdoor to policy making: the use of philosophers by the Supreme Court

Article Abstract:

Courts should not use philosophical arguments to make legal decisions. Philosophers work in a theoretical realm that is not concerned with institutional boundaries or legal precedent. Judicial decisions have practical implications within a political system that has cultural references and historical imperatives. The US Supreme Court was correct to disregard a brief filed by six notable American philosophers arguing for a constitutional right to die when the Court upheld a state's right to ban assisted suicide in Vacco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg.

Author: Rao, Neomi
Publisher: University of Chicago Law School
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 1998
Analysis, Usage, Philosophy, Judicial process

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Sympathy, community, and promising: Adam Smith's case for reviving moral consideration

Article Abstract:

Adam Smith espoused a theory of emotion and reason by which gratuitous promises supported by moral consideration would be legally enforceable. Moral consideration refers to the love and affection that are the usual basis for donative promises between family members. Under traditional contract law, promises supported only by moral consideration are not legally enforceable. Smith's argument that gratuitous promises engender expectations that the law ought to enforce is a bold challenge to the modern orthodoxy.

Author: Moller, Mark K.
Publisher: University of Chicago Law School
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 1999
Beliefs, opinions and attitudes, Ethical aspects, Promise (Law), Smith, Adam (Economist), Consideration (Law), Contracts, Gratuitous, Gratuitous contracts

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The Court of International Trade's political party diversity requirement: unconstitutional under any separation of powers treaty

Article Abstract:

The President may not appoint more than five members of the nine-member Court of International Trade from a single political party. This provision is unconstitutional under either of two theories of separation of powers.

Author: Rappaport, Adam J.
Publisher: University of Chicago Law School
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 2001
Standards, Laws, regulations and rules, Political parties, Separation of powers, United States. Court of International Trade

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: From jeans to genes: the evolving nature of property of the estate. It's all fun and games until somebody declares bankruptcy: a debtor's right to season ticket holder status
  • Abstracts: Don't tell juries about statutory damage caps: the merits of nondisclosure. Shareholder litigation under indeterminate corporate law
  • Abstracts: Rat day afternoon. Free speech on the firing line: the legal controversy continues. Muzzling the speech cops
  • Abstracts: The states can wait: the immediate appealability of orders denying Eleventh Amendment immunity
  • Abstracts: Gabby in Wonderland - through the Internet looking glass. Screening the future for virtual ADR. The electronic personality and digital self
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.