Abstract

 


 



Neutrality and Judicial Review


Frederick Schauer


University of Virginia School of Law


Law and Philosophy, Vol. 22, 2003

Abstract:     
Since Herbert Wechsler's famous article, the topic of neutrality has played central stage in many debates about judicial review specifically and constitutional law generally. On closer inspection, however, it turns out that the heading of "neutrality" encompasses not one but four different debates. One is about principled adjudication, another is about decision according to rules, a third is about substantive neutrality, and the fourth is about the desirability (or not) of designing the institutions of judicial review without regard to likely substantive outcomes and without regard to the likely staffing of those institutions. This paper distinguishes these four conceptions of neutrality and analyzes each of them.

Accepted Paper Series


Date posted: July 16, 2003  

Suggested Citation

Schauer, Frederick, Neutrality and Judicial Review. Law and Philosophy, Vol. 22, 2003. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=415180

Contact Information

Frederick Schauer (Contact Author)
University of Virginia School of Law ( email )
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States
434-924-6777 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 596

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.328 seconds