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 The Techniques of Small Talk by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Syntactic Movements by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Der 'Lebensbrunnen' in Lissabon und das Spätwerk von Hans Holbein d.Ä. by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Theories for Explaining Linguistic Behaviour in Gender Interaction by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Multiculturalism and magic realism? Between fiction and reality by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Partisanship and Party Ideology: Comparing Canada and the United States of America by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Figure conception and figure characterisation in Alan Ayckbourn's 'Things we do for love' by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book 'The social responsibility of business...' - A position paper on Milton Friedman by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Energy and environment in Africa - the twin challenge of climate change mitigation and sustainable development by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book HSBC Banking and Finance by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book An Essay on Companion Animals by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book 'Germany 1990 is not Germany 1939' - The British response to German unification by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book Beyond Archangel - The Archangel Theme in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The Place of Government and the Press in rousing unemployed Graduates' interest to Entrepreneurship by Ian Benitez
Cover of the book The relationship between writing, gender relations and sexuality in modernist fiction with reference to 'Mrs. Dalloway' and 'Ulysses' 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