• Precedent and Disagreement

    Author(s):
    Glen Staszewski
    Date:
    2018
    Group(s):
    MSU Law Faculty Repository
    Item Type:
    Article
    Permanent URL:
    https://doi.org/10.17613/fa8f-6f08
    Abstract:
    Supreme Court justices have fundamentally competing perspectives regarding the best approach to constitutional interpretation. The Court has therefore never adopted one authoritative methodology of constitutional interpretation. Rather, the Court uses different methodologies to decide different cases, justices frequently vacillate in their preferred interpretive methods, and many decisions fail to reflect any foundational approach. Within the bounds of legitimate judicial craft, constitutional interpretation-and legal interpretation more generally-is a methodological free-for-all.
    Metadata:
    xml
    Published as:
    Journal article     Show details
    Pub. Date:
    2018
    Journal:
    Michigan Law Review
    Volume:
    116
    Page Range:
    1019 - 1044
    Status:
    Published
    Last Updated:
    1 year ago
    License:
    Attribution
    Share this:

    Downloads

    Item Name: pdf precedent-and-disagreement.pdf
      Download View in browser
    Activity: Downloads: 4

    Back to Deposits