Difference between revisions of "Talk:Responsive interpretation"
m (Responsive interpretation moved to Talk:Responsive interpretation: move to talk, because this is just notes for a proposed article) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The purpose of constitutional adjudication is to assess the constitutional validity of state actions, like the hiring of legislative chaplains. But courts can achieve this purpose only to the extent they have the authority to evaluate, in the name of the Constitution, the validity of otherwise perfectly legal state actions. Every act of constitutional interpretation invokes and depends upon this authority, and for this reason "constitutional interpretation is essentially about the sources of authority in American political life."[32] What in fact distinguishes the three theories of interpretation displayed in Chambers —theories that I shall respectively call "doctrinal," "historical," and "responsive" interpretation—is that each appeals to a different conception of constitutional authority. [http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft9q2nb693&chunk.id=0&doc.view=print] | The purpose of constitutional adjudication is to assess the constitutional validity of state actions, like the hiring of legislative chaplains. But courts can achieve this purpose only to the extent they have the authority to evaluate, in the name of the Constitution, the validity of otherwise perfectly legal state actions. Every act of constitutional interpretation invokes and depends upon this authority, and for this reason "constitutional interpretation is essentially about the sources of authority in American political life."[32] What in fact distinguishes the three theories of interpretation displayed in Chambers —theories that I shall respectively call "doctrinal," "historical," and "responsive" interpretation—is that each appeals to a different conception of constitutional authority. [http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft9q2nb693&chunk.id=0&doc.view=print] | ||
| + | |||
| + | : That's the right article - <3 Modalities of Interpretation. -'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 16:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 20:00, March 28, 2007
The purpose of constitutional adjudication is to assess the constitutional validity of state actions, like the hiring of legislative chaplains. But courts can achieve this purpose only to the extent they have the authority to evaluate, in the name of the Constitution, the validity of otherwise perfectly legal state actions. Every act of constitutional interpretation invokes and depends upon this authority, and for this reason "constitutional interpretation is essentially about the sources of authority in American political life."[32] What in fact distinguishes the three theories of interpretation displayed in Chambers —theories that I shall respectively call "doctrinal," "historical," and "responsive" interpretation—is that each appeals to a different conception of constitutional authority. [1]
- That's the right article - <3 Modalities of Interpretation. -AmesGyo! 16:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
