Professor Perry and Consensualism
Perry presupposes that there should be a wide consensus on the meaning of a provision.
However, this assumption is not tested under the condition of social consensus because it would be difficult to achieve a large agreement on this point.
For example, if the meaning of “liberty” relied only on how people used the word, liberty would not exist, and there should be only liberty talk.
Then he justifies his assumption on the basis of democracy: the only way to legitimize the power on unelected judges who invoke a principle is doing it on the ground of social consensus, in order to maintain democracy.
But this conception of democracy cannot rely on a social consensus: in this view, individual rights against the community would not exist, because the community would be the very source of law through its consensus.
Therefore, Perry’s conception of democracy is based on what he intends as the best understanding of democracy. In this sense, in absence of consensus, it is a moral reality which justifies his search for social consensus. Both Perry and Black de facto rely on controversial conceptions of democracy that they leave undefined and both thus support a fusion of constitutional law and moral philosophy.
Continua a leggere:
- Successivo: Consensualism and Philosophic Approach
- Precedente: Justice Black and Plain Words Textualism
Per approfondire questo argomento, consulta le Tesi:
- Antitrust Private Enforcement: Stati Uniti e Unione Europea a confronto
- Current Issues in American Politics and Society
- La qualità del lavoro nell'esperienza dell'OIL e nelle politiche sociali europee
- La partecipazione dei terzi al sistema di risoluzione delle controversie del WTO
- Tutela contrattuale del consumatore ed azione inibitoria
Puoi scaricare gratuitamente questo appunto in versione integrale.