Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1013638
 
 

Citations (2)



 
 

Footnotes (161)



 


 



Ambivalence about Formalism


Jonathan T. Molot


Georgetown University Law Center


Virginia Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 1, 2007
Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 07-12

Abstract:     
In statutory interpretation, many scholars try to reconcile judicial power with democracy by cabining judicial discretion and rendering judges more faithful agents of Congress. Although debate pervades the field, the dominant approach is to rely on formalism to narrow judicial leeway and promote legislative supremacy. In constitutional theory, by contrast, many scholars respond to a very similar problem with a very different strategy. Here too, the concern is that judges will exercise power in a manner that substitutes judicial preferences for political will, and here too, there is as much disagreement as agreement. But instead of casting judicial discretion as the source of the problem, there is a growing trend in constitutional scholarship toward embracing judicial discretion as part of the solution. Many constitutional theorists urge judges to employ discretionary tools in a manner that limits their intrusions into the political process and minimizes the disruption associated with judicial review. These constitutional scholars tend to reject formalism in favor of a form of minimalism that is in many respects the antithesis of formalism.

Professor Molot suggests that both sets of scholars have gone too far in their positions on formalism. Statutory scholars often overlook the importance of judicial flexibility as an antidote to the excesses of formalism. Constitutional scholars often overlook the importance of formal constraints and fidelity to law. Using administrative law as a counterexample, Professor Molot sketches out a more balanced approach to formalism that he argues is superior to the one-sided approaches that have increasingly characterized statutory and constitutional scholarship today.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 58

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 18, 2007  

Suggested Citation

Molot, Jonathan T., Ambivalence about Formalism. Virginia Law Review, Vol. 93, No. 1, 2007; Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 07-12. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1013638

Contact Information

Jonathan T. Molot (Contact Author)
Georgetown University Law Center ( email )
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 600
Downloads: 144
Download Rank: 113,865
Citations:  2
Footnotes:  161

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.485 seconds