Jurisprudence - Legal Reasoning

What is the "Descriptive Thesis" of legal formalism?

It posits that legal reasoning is a "mechanical" application of legal rules to facts.

What is the formalist formula for legal decision-making?

R + F = C ('Rules plus facts yield conclusion').

What logic structure does formalist reasoning primarily rely on?

The deductive syllogism (modus ponens).

Why is "objectivity" considered a key appeal of formalism?

It ensures the law does not depend on a judge's personal feelings or background, but on objective rules and facts.

What is "Rule-skepticism"?

The view that legal rules do not constrain judges and can be reinterpreted in so many ways that they do not determine the outcome of a case.

According to Hart, what two devices does law use to communicate general standards?

Legislation and Precedent.

In Hart's theory of language, what is the "core of certainty"?

The clear instances where a rule indisputably applies (e.g., a car is definitely a "vehicle" in the park).

In Hart's theory of language, what is the "penumbra of doubt"?

The uncertain fringe of a rule where it is unclear if the rule applies (e.g., is a skateboard a vehicle?).

According to Hart, what must judges do in "hard cases" that fall within the penumbra of doubt?

They must exercise judicial discretion to make new law.

What is MacCormick's "extended formalism"?

A theory where deductive reasoning is central, but even within the realm of discretion, legal reasoning is constrained by specific rational requirements.

What does MacCormick mean by the constraint of "Universalizability"?

Judges must treat like cases alike, viewing the current case as an instance of a general rule.

What does MacCormick mean by the constraint of "Consistency"?

A judicial decision must not logically contradict existing legal rules.

What does MacCormick mean by the constraint of "Coherence"?

Decisions must be based on principles derived from existing rules, favoring outcomes that align with the system's values.

What is the "Pedigree Thesis"?

The positivist claim that law is identified by specific criteria regarding its manner of adoption (pedigree), not its content.

What is the "Discretion Thesis" that Dworkin challenges?

The view that if a clear rule does not cover a case, the judge must exercise discretion and make new law because rules are exhaustive.

How do "Rules" differ from "Principles" regarding their application?

Rules are binary (all-or-nothing), while principles have weight and can be balanced against one another.

Which case does Dworkin use to illustrate the conflict between rules and principles regarding inheritance?

Riggs v Palmer (1889).

What legal principle was applied in Riggs v Palmer?

"No one can profit from his own wrong".

According to "Exclusive Legal Positivism," when are principles considered law?

Only when they can be traced back to a social source (pedigree), such as previous judgments.

What is "Inclusive (Soft) Legal Positivism"?

The view that moral principles can be part of the law if the Rule of Recognition incorporates them as criteria for validity.

What is an "Empirical Disagreement" in law?

A disagreement about facts, such as whether a statute is actually in the official books.

What is a "Theoretical Disagreement" in law?

A disagreement about the grounds of law (what counts as law) even when all facts are agreed upon.

What case does Dworkin use to illustrate theoretical disagreement regarding a dam and an endangered fish?

Tennessee Valley Authority v Hill ('The Snail Darter Case').

What constitutes the "Interpretive Attitude" in Dworkin's theory?

Understanding that legal practices have purposes, and the practice must be interpreted to serve those purposes.

What is the "Checkerboard" example used to demonstrate in Dworkin's theory?

That law requires "integrity" (principled consistency), which rejects compromises like allowing abortion every other day.

What analogy does Dworkin use to explain how judges should interpret law like a developing story?

The "chain novel" analogy.

In the chain novel analogy, what two dimensions must a judge satisfy?

Fit (adhering to previous chapters/precedent) and Justification (making the story/law the best it can be morally).

Who is "Hercules" in Dworkin's jurisprudence?

A metaphorical judge with supernatural powers who can find the single right answer by constructing a complete moral justification of the law.

What is Dworkin's final mature position regarding the relationship between law and morality?

Law is a part of morality (the "one-system" view).

Why does Dworkin argue that the "Discretion Thesis" fails to explain judicial behavior?

Because judges believe they are "applying the law" and finding correct answers even in hard cases, rather than inventing new law.