Dews, Dworks, and Poses Decide Lochner

Contemporary Pragmatism 7 (2):15-44 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Lochner represents a crucial case in American constitutional law. An investigation of the decision highlights important philosophical aspects of the place of law in a democratic society. Analysis of contemporary stances on Lochner, the actual Lochner opinion (including the dissents by Harlan and Holmes) and how judges following the legal philosophies of John Dewey, Ronald Dworkin and Richard Posner (“Dews,” “Dworks,” and “Poses”) would have decided the case shows that Dewey’s theory of law and democracy emerges as the most attractive alternative.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-02-17

Downloads
93 (#178,490)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brian E. Butler
University of North Carolina, Asheville

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

.Michael I. Posner & Charles R. Snyder - 2004 - Psychology Press.
.Dworkin Ronald - 1996 - Puf.
Overcoming law.Richard A. Posner (ed.) - 1995 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Freedom.John Dewey - 2010 - Free Inquiry 30:20-23.
Force and Coercion.John Dewey - 1916 - International Journal of Ethics 26 (3):359-367.

View all 8 references / Add more references