LAWASINTERPRETIVEThis relates to judicial review and judicial decision making. The question that must be keptin mind is how do judges judge? We will examine 3 views but there are numerous views that fall on a spectrum. On the onehand is formalism and on the other is legal realism.Realists hold that judges are not bound to precedent and have full and unlimiteddiscretion in determining what the law is and giving it meaning. H answer can befound from anywhere and from anything.Formalists (textualists) speak to the text and the issue of determinism. Judges shouldapply rules according to their plain meaning regardless of whether it is unjust orabsurd. The advantage of this approach is that it promotes legal certainty and bindsjudges to the law as they have no discretion and bound by the authority. Lastlypolitical decision making should be left to the legislature and not does who are notelected (democratic theory)The chapter focuses on the natural perspective and makes reference to Fuller and Dworkin.Fuller on judicial adjudication:Fuller says that there is a written established law (statute), to positivists this is all that is
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 3 pages?