My Account Log in

5 options

Beyond the formalist-realist divide : the role of politics in judging / Brian Z. Tamanaha.

De Gruyter Princeton University Press eBook-Package Backlist 2000-2013 Available online

View online

EBSCOhost Academic eBook Collection (North America) Available online

View online

EBSCOhost eBook Community College Collection Available online

View online

Ebook Central University Press Available online

View online

Ebscohost Ebooks University Press Collection (North America) Available online

View online
Format:
Book
Author/Creator:
Tamanaha, Brian Z.
Language:
English
Subjects (All):
Judges--United States.
Judges.
Judicial process--United States.
Judicial process.
Law--Political aspects--United States.
Law.
Law--United States--Philosophy.
Physical Description:
1 online resource (265 p.)
Edition:
Course Book
Place of Publication:
Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press, c2010.
Language Note:
English
Summary:
According to conventional wisdom in American legal culture, the 1870's to 1920's was the age of legal formalism, when judges believed that the law was autonomous and logically ordered, and that they mechanically deduced right answers in cases. In the 1920's and 1930's, the story continues, the legal realists discredited this view by demonstrating that the law is marked by gaps and contradictions, arguing that judges construct legal justifications to support desired outcomes. This often-repeated historical account is virtually taken for granted today, and continues to shape understandings about judging. In this groundbreaking book, esteemed legal theorist Brian Tamanaha thoroughly debunks the formalist-realist divide. Drawing from extensive research into the writings of judges and scholars, Tamanaha shows how, over the past century and a half, jurists have regularly expressed a balanced view of judging that acknowledges the limitations of law and of judges, yet recognizes that judges can and do render rule-bound decisions. He reveals how the story about the formalist age was an invention of politically motivated critics of the courts, and how it has led to significant misunderstandings about legal realism. Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide traces how this false tale has distorted studies of judging by political scientists and debates among legal theorists. Recovering a balanced realism about judging, this book fundamentally rewrites legal history and offers a fresh perspective for theorists, judges, and practitioners of law.
Contents:
Front matter
Contents
Acknowledgments
1. Introduction
Part One. The Legal Formalists
2. The Myth about Beliefs in the Common Law
3. The Myth about "Mechanical Jurisprudence"
4. The Holes in the Story about Legal Formalism
Part Two. The Legal Realists
5. Realism before the Legal Realists
6. A Reconstruction of Legal Realism
Part Three. Studies of Judging
7. The Slant in the "Judicial Politics" Field
8. What Quantitative Studies of Judging Have Found
Part Four. Legal Theory
9. The Emptiness of "Formalism" in Legal Theory
10. Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide
Afterword
Notes
Index
Notes:
Description based upon print version of record.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN:
9786612458590
9781282458598
1282458590
9781400831982
1400831989
OCLC:
593215217

The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.

Find

Home Release notes

My Account

Shelf Request an item Bookmarks Fines and fees Settings

Guides

Using the Find catalog Using Articles+ Using your account