On Avoiding Foundational Questions
View/ Open
SunsteinReply.pdf (70.64Kb)
Access Status
Full text of the requested work is not available in DASH at this time ("restricted access"). For more information on restricted deposits, see our FAQ.Author
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Cass R. Sunstein, On Avoiding Foundational Questions, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 241 (2007).Abstract
In both legal practice and legal scholarship, it is sometimes best to proceed without attempting to answer the foundational questions. Originalists can inquire into the original public meaning of the Equal Protection Clause without defending originalism. Economic analysts of law can ask how to promote efficiency without defending the view that the law should aim at efficiency. It would be useful to know how utilitarians and retributivists would approach punitive damage awards, without resolving the question whether we should be utilitarians or retributivists. Here, as elsewhere, a division of labor makes good sense. Some people (or some works) take certain judgments for granted and proceed from there; other people (or other works) try to resolve the deepest questions.Citable link to this page
http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11354038
Collections
- HLS Scholarly Articles [1913]
Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)