A Discussion of Critical Legal Studies' Claim of Legal Indeterminacy

Nonfiction, Reference & Language, Law, Legal History
Cover of the book A Discussion of Critical Legal Studies' Claim of Legal Indeterminacy by Ian Benitez, GRIN Publishing
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Ian Benitez ISBN: 9783668032583
Publisher: GRIN Publishing Publication: August 19, 2015
Imprint: GRIN Publishing Language: English
Author: Ian Benitez
ISBN: 9783668032583
Publisher: GRIN Publishing
Publication: August 19, 2015
Imprint: GRIN Publishing
Language: English

Bachelor Thesis from the year 2015 in the subject Law - Philosophy, History and Sociology of Law, grade: 1.75, , course: Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, language: English, abstract: This paper challenges the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) claims of legal indeterminacy. It shall use a legal formalist logic and language as its main assertion, further maintaining that the CLS claims is only grounded in ambiguity and confusion. CLS is a legal theory that challenges and overturns accepted norms and standards in legal theory and practice. They maintained that law in the historical and contemporary society has an alleged impartiality, and it is used as a tool of privilege and power - law is politics. Consequently, CLS maintained that these results to indeterminacy of law. Legal indeterminacy can be summed up as contrary to the common understanding that legal materials, statutes and case law, do not really answer legal disputes. Legal principles and doctrines, as CLS scholars claim, are said to be indeterminate, for it is riddle with gaps, conflicts, and anomalies that are widely present even in simple cases. Legal indeterminacy also rises because of the underlying political power - law is politics - that implicates law as merely a tool for oppression. This thesis shows that CLS assertions with legal indeterminacy is only grounded on ambiguity. On one hand, using the main concept of legal formalist logic and language grounded with sub-arguments: inherent generality of legal language, reasoned elaboration, and neutral principles, it refutes the CLS claims of legal indeterminacy. On the other, the paper maintains that their main reason of legal indeterminacy, 'law is politics', is merely a statement of fact that currently happens in society is sentimental and weak through counterexamples.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Bachelor Thesis from the year 2015 in the subject Law - Philosophy, History and Sociology of Law, grade: 1.75, , course: Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, language: English, abstract: This paper challenges the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) claims of legal indeterminacy. It shall use a legal formalist logic and language as its main assertion, further maintaining that the CLS claims is only grounded in ambiguity and confusion. CLS is a legal theory that challenges and overturns accepted norms and standards in legal theory and practice. They maintained that law in the historical and contemporary society has an alleged impartiality, and it is used as a tool of privilege and power - law is politics. Consequently, CLS maintained that these results to indeterminacy of law. Legal indeterminacy can be summed up as contrary to the common understanding that legal materials, statutes and case law, do not really answer legal disputes. Legal principles and doctrines, as CLS scholars claim, are said to be indeterminate, for it is riddle with gaps, conflicts, and anomalies that are widely present even in simple cases. Legal indeterminacy also rises because of the underlying political power - law is politics - that implicates law as merely a tool for oppression. This thesis shows that CLS assertions with legal indeterminacy is only grounded on ambiguity. On one hand, using the main concept of legal formalist logic and language grounded with sub-arguments: inherent generality of legal language, reasoned elaboration, and neutral principles, it refutes the CLS claims of legal indeterminacy. On the other, the paper maintains that their main reason of legal indeterminacy, 'law is politics', is merely a statement of fact that currently happens in society is sentimental and weak through counterexamples.

More books from GRIN Publishing

Cover of the book Uno ade? The System of 'Collective Security' in the Context of the Iraq-Kuwait-Crisis by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Can static type systems speed up programming? An experimental evaluation of static and dynamic type systems by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Measuring Customer Satisfaction to Identify Areas of Sales by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book How the decoding of the human brain began by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Open Method of Coordination: A New Effective Form of Governance in the EU? by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Myth of Alfred Hitchcock by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Steele's The Conscious Lovers and Goldsmith's She Stoops to Conquer. A question of sentiment. by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Difficulty of the Amendment Process of the Constitution of the United States of America and Freedom of Speech and its limits by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Homeostasis and the human kidney by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Erklärungen zur Offenbarung Jesu Christi nach Parallelstellen der Bibel by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Consumer preferences in a comparative European market research study by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Formation of European Economic Community in the context of International Political Economy Theory by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Downtown Dealership - An Effective Marketing Mix by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Name Symbolism and Multilayer Ambiguity in Henry James' 'Daisy Miller' by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Evolution of the English Scientific Register by Ian Benitez
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy