Peer Disagreement in Law.

1. Auflage 2020
ISBN: 978-3-428-15928-4
Verlag: Duncker & Humblot

Buch, Englisch, Band 295, 125 Seiten, Format (B × H): 157 mm x 233 mm, Gewicht: 235 g

Reihe: Schriften zur Rechtstheorie

Philosophers have been puzzled for quite some time by the fact that intelligent and generally reasonable individuals who are equally well-informed and familiar with the same bodies of evidence still disagree with one another. Legal theorists wonder why this is puzzling for philosophers in the first place as disagreement is the very foundation of their work. This book, placed at the intersection of philosophical epistemology and jurisprudence, deals with the theoretical challenges that disagreements between judges create. The philosophical debate is applied to German and American legal disputes. How can such disagreements be integrated into the general philosophical debate on 'peer disagreement' and into the legal theory of judicial decisionmaking? How should one deal with such disagreements under the existing legal framework but also in terms of legal policy?

Autoren/Hrsg.

Villanueva Breulmann, Isabell

Fachgebiete

• Geisteswissenschaften Philosophie Rechtsphilosophie, Rechtsethik
• Rechtswissenschaften Recht, Rechtswissenschaft Allgemein Rechtstheorie, Rechtsmethodik, Rechtsdogmatik, Rechtsprechungslehre
• Rechtswissenschaften Recht, Rechtswissenschaft Allgemein Rechtsphilosophie, Rechtsethik

Inhaltsverzeichnis

I. Introduction
Peer Disagreement in Law – Deep Disagreements – Chapter Summary – Limitations
II. Supreme Court: Hobby Lobby
The Battle for Universal Health Care – The Hobby Lobby Case – The Disagreements Involved in the Hobby Lobby Case – The Disagreements in Detail – Overview of the Sources of Disagreement – Analysis Disagreements – The Contraception Mandate Debate: Deep Disagreements
III. Bundesverfassungsgericht: Incest
Incest and the Criminal Law – The Incest Case – The Disagreements Involved in Incest – Disagreements in Detail – Overview Sources of Disagreement – Analysis Disagreements – The Incest Debate: Deep Disagreements
IV. Disagreeing Justices
Peer Disagreement and Disagreeing Justices – Ideology and Disagreeing Justices – Conclusion
V. Dealing with Disagreement
Legal Practice – Legal Policy – Legal Disagreement and Philosophy
References
Index

Über Autor(innen)

Isabell Villanueva studierte Rechtswissenschaften, Philosophie und Kunstgeschichte an der Universität Trier, der Universidad de Sevilla, der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster und der Humboldt Universität zu Berlin. Von 2013 bis 2018 promovierte sie als Elsa-Neumann- und Caroline von Humboldt-Stipendiatin bei Prof. Dr. Keil und Prof. Dr. Christoph Möllers zu 'Peer Disagreement in Law' mit einem zweieinhalbjährigen Forschungsaufenthalt an der New York University und Columbia University in den USA unter der Betreuung von Paul Boghossian und Joseph Raz. Seit 2019 ist sie als Richterin in Berlin tätig.

Isabell Villanueva studied law, philosophy and art history at the University of Trier, the Universidad de Sevilla, the Westfälische Wilhelms-University of Münster and the Humboldt University of Berlin. From 2013 to 2018 she did her PhD under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Keil and Prof. Christoph Möllers and worked on 'Peer Disagreement in Law' with a two and a half year research stay at New York University and Columbia University sponsored by Paul Boghossian and Joseph Raz. She has been working as a judge in Berlin since 2019.