Every Theory of Constitutional Interpretation Is Wrong | FO° Talks
@FairObserver #ConstitutionalLaw #JudicialInterpretation #MarkTushnet #Originalism #LivingConstitutionalism #JudicialDecisionMaking #LegalTheory #SupremeCourt #LawAndPolicy #LegalScholar #JudicialCraft #ConstitutionalTheory #LegalJudgment #JusticeHolmes #JusticeCardozo #LegalPhilosophy #CourtTheory #LegalDebate #LawAndJustice #FairObserver #FOTalks
In this FO° Talks, Fair Observer Chief of Staff Anton Schauble and Professor Mark Tushnet dive into the latter’s book, Who Am I to Judge? Judicial Craft Versus Constitutional Theory. Tushnet critiques dominant theories like originalism and living constitutionalism, arguing that they fail to effectively constrain judicial decision-making. He explains that these theories are too flexible, allowing judges to inject personal biases into rulings. Tushnet also discusses the gap between academic theories and judicial practice, noting that judges often rely on incomplete interpretations, leading to policy-driven decisions. He advocates for a more nuanced approach to judicial decision-making, emphasizing experience and judgment over rigid theoretical frameworks.
Chapters :
00:00 Intro
00:05 Limitations of constitutional interpretation theories
05:40 Judicial decision-making as policy-bound
17:06 Originalism and living constitutionalism
29:29 The role of judges
41:42 Holmes and Cardozo: ideal judges
Fair Observer is an independent nonprofit media organization that has published more than 2,500 voices from over 90 countries, including statesmen, retired military officers, former diplomats and leading professors, along with some of the brightest young public intellectuals from around the world.
Check us out: https://www.fairobserver.com/
Follow Fair Observer on
►LinkedIn: https://in.linkedin.com/company/fair-observer
►Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/fairobserver
►Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fairobserver ►Twitter: https://twitter.com/myfairobserver"
Видео Every Theory of Constitutional Interpretation Is Wrong | FO° Talks канала Fair Observer
fair observer, fo, fo live, fo talks, fo exclusive, atul singh
In this FO° Talks, Fair Observer Chief of Staff Anton Schauble and Professor Mark Tushnet dive into the latter’s book, Who Am I to Judge? Judicial Craft Versus Constitutional Theory. Tushnet critiques dominant theories like originalism and living constitutionalism, arguing that they fail to effectively constrain judicial decision-making. He explains that these theories are too flexible, allowing judges to inject personal biases into rulings. Tushnet also discusses the gap between academic theories and judicial practice, noting that judges often rely on incomplete interpretations, leading to policy-driven decisions. He advocates for a more nuanced approach to judicial decision-making, emphasizing experience and judgment over rigid theoretical frameworks.
Chapters :
00:00 Intro
00:05 Limitations of constitutional interpretation theories
05:40 Judicial decision-making as policy-bound
17:06 Originalism and living constitutionalism
29:29 The role of judges
41:42 Holmes and Cardozo: ideal judges
Fair Observer is an independent nonprofit media organization that has published more than 2,500 voices from over 90 countries, including statesmen, retired military officers, former diplomats and leading professors, along with some of the brightest young public intellectuals from around the world.
Check us out: https://www.fairobserver.com/
Follow Fair Observer on
►LinkedIn: https://in.linkedin.com/company/fair-observer
►Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/fairobserver
►Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fairobserver ►Twitter: https://twitter.com/myfairobserver"
Видео Every Theory of Constitutional Interpretation Is Wrong | FO° Talks канала Fair Observer
fair observer, fo, fo live, fo talks, fo exclusive, atul singh
Показать
Комментарии отсутствуют
Информация о видео
12 марта 2025 г. 16:30:06
00:50:12
Другие видео канала




















