Posted by Sasha Volokh:
Would love comments:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_09_09-2007_09_15.shtml#1189688131


   I'm delighted to report that my new article, [1]Choosing Interpretive
   Methods: A Positive Theory of Judges and Everyone Else, is going to be
   published in the June 2008 issue of the [2]NYU Law Review. Here's the
   abstract:

     In this Article, I propose a theory of how rational, ideologically
     motivated judges might choose interpretive methods, and how
     rational, ideologically motivated laymen�legislators, litigation
     organizations, lobbyists, scholars, and citizens�might respond. I
     assume that judges not only have ideological preferences but also
     (perhaps merely strategically) want to write plausible opinions. As
     a result, if judges decide to use any particular method of
     statutory or constitutional interpretation, the plausibility
     demands of the method they use will make them deviate from their
     own ideal points in the direction of the �most plausible point� of
     that method.

     When judges can choose their interpretive method, they select the
     method that (taking these deviations into account) comes as close
     as possible to their favored outcome. This creates a selection
     bias, which makes interpretive methods� observed distributions
     differ systematically from their true distributions. This bias
     explains how one can favor mandating an interpretive method even
     though one is politically closer to the current practitioners of a
     different method.

     Judges can also choose whether to use the same method from case to
     case. I explain why, even though ideologically motivated judges (or
     litigation groups) might want to make the method they prefer in
     most cases mandatory for everyone, they do not personally have much
     effect on whether other judges use that method, and so it is
     rational for them to deviate from that preferred method in those
     cases where they prefer a different method.

   It's going to be quite a while before this appears in print, so
   comments are welcome. The paper is available [3]here.

References

   1. http://works.bepress.com/alexander_volokh/23
   2. http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/lawreview/
   3. http://works.bepress.com/alexander_volokh/23

_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh

Reply via email to