Citations (1)


Footnotes (32)



Deconstruction's Legal Career

Jack M. Balkin

Yale University - Law School

Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 101, 2005
Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 104

This article describes law's encounter with deconstruction, and how it changed deconstruction. In the hands of lawyers, deconstruction became a set of rhetorical strategies for critiquing legal distinctions and showing their ideological character. Legal scholars used deconstructive arguments to offer normative prescriptions in ways quite different from literary critics or philosophers. Although in theory all texts and distinctions are deconstructable, legal scholars assumed that some interpretations were better than others. Legal deconstruction thus became a set of repeatable rhetorical practices used for pragmatic purposes; and it revealed that these rhetorical and pragmatic features were already present in literary and philosophical deconstruction.

Deconstruction's encounter with law also overturned several popular assumptions about deconstruction. First, legal deconstruction does not assert that legal texts have no meaning or that their meanings are indecipherable. Rather, it argues that texts are overflowing with meanings that point in different directions and emerge over time. Second, one deconstructs conceptual oppositions not to show that legal concepts have no boundaries, but that their boundaries are fluid and appear differently as the conceptual opposition is placed into new interpretive contexts. Legal deconstruction asserts that legal distinctions are nested oppositions - conceptual oppositions whose terms bear a relation of mutual dependence and differentiation; this complicated relationship is revealed as interpretive contexts change. Ideological drift, in which concepts change their political valence as they are repeatedly invoked at different points in history, is a special case of this phenomenon. Third, instead of asserting that legal doctrine is radically indeterminate, legal deconstruction suggests that social construction places ideological constraints on legal decisionmaking and helps produce the sense that some arguments are better than others. Finally, far from denying the existence of fundamental human values, legal deconstruction presupposes a transcendent value of justice which law attempts to express but always fails fully to articulate.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 23

Keywords: deconstruction, jurisprudence, ideology, critical legal studies

JEL Classification: K11

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: November 13, 2005  

Suggested Citation

Balkin, Jack M., Deconstruction's Legal Career. Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, p. 101, 2005; Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper No. 104. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=842284

Contact Information

Jack M. Balkin (Contact Author)
Yale University - Law School ( email )
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States
203-432-1620 (Phone)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 3,301
Downloads: 593
Download Rank: 33,873
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  32