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 E. (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: Ann Arbor University of Michigan Press [2016]
In:Year: 2016
Online Access: Cover (Thumbnail cover image)
Volltext (View this content on Open Research Library)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Subito Delivery Service: Order now.
Keywords:
Related Items:Erscheint auch als: 1620588145

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a2200000 4500
001 170331137X
003 DE-627
005 20220729104801.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 200702s2016 xxu|||||o 00| ||eng c
020 |a 9780472902347  |9 978-0-472-90234-7 
020 |a 9780472122158  |9 978-0-472-12215-8 
035 |a (DE-627)170331137X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP170331137X 
035 |a (OCoLC)1193110887 
035 |a (KNOWLEDGE)925011e5-605e-49aa-8c07-d20a14eaa405 
035 |a (EBP)05994725X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
044 |c XD-US 
082 0 |a 340.57 
084 |a INTRECHT  |q DE-1a  |2 fid 
084 |a 86.12  |2 bkl 
100 1 |a Edlin, Douglas E.  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1127537482  |0 (DE-627)881941212  |0 (DE-576)189251964  |4 aut 
109 |a Edlin, Douglas E. 
245 1 0 |a Common law judging  |b subjectivity, impartiality, and the making of law  |c Douglas E. Edlin 
264 1 |a Ann Arbor  |b University of Michigan Press  |c [2016] 
264 2 |a Berlin  |b Knowledge Unlatched 
300 |a 1 Online-Ressource 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
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. 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 
650 0 |a Common Law 
650 0 |a Judicial Process  |x English-speaking countries 
650 0 |a Political Science 
650 4 |a Political Science / American Government / Judicial Branch 
655 0 |a Electronic books 
689 0 0 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4130774-4  |0 (DE-627)105699977  |0 (DE-576)209621834  |a Common law  |2 gnd 
689 0 1 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4115710-2  |0 (DE-627)105812242  |0 (DE-576)209495456  |a Rechtsprechung  |2 gnd 
689 0 |5 (DE-627) 
776 1 |z 9780472130023 
776 0 8 |i Erscheint auch als  |n Druck-Ausgabe  |a Edlin, Douglas E.  |t Common law judging  |d Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, 2016  |h x, 262 Seiten  |w (DE-627)1620588145  |w (DE-576)476694655  |z 9780472130023 
856 4 0 |u https://openresearchlibrary.org/content/925011e5-605e-49aa-8c07-d20a14eaa405  |m X:KNOWLEDGE  |x Verlag  |z View this content on Open Research Library  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 2 |u https://library.biblioboard.com/ext/api/media/925011e5-605e-49aa-8c07-d20a14eaa405/assets/thumbnail.jpg  |m X:KNOWLEDGE  |x Verlag  |z Thumbnail cover image  |3 Cover 
912 |a ZDB-119-KNU  |b 2019 
912 |a ZDB-119-KSH  |b 2019 
935 |a mkri 
936 b k |a 86.12  |j Common Law  |0 (DE-627)106413503 
950 |a Backlist 
950 |a Backlist 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdok_oa001.raw