The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pelegrino da Silva, Matheus
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Economic Analysis of law Review
Texto Completo: https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/13150
Resumo: The article uses the literature on empirical findings on panel effects and dissent aversion in order to criticize Dworkin’s conception of legal interpretation and to support Kelsen’s theory of the legal frame and his assertion that legal interpretation consists of an act of cognition and an act of will. Dworkin’s view of discretion as usually absent from the practice of legal interpretation is confronted through the presentation and analysis of research on dissent aversion and panel effects that indicate the pervasive influence of non-legal aspects in the interpretative patterns shown by circuit court judges. The identified interpretative patterns are also referred to in order to support Kelsen’s conception of legal interpretation as involving both the identification of a legal frame and a subsequent act of will that consists of the selection that is not cognitively based of one of the available options.
id UCB-6_41c69c7193a54b3d8d773457bdb2e1f4
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.portalrevistas.ucb.br:article/13150
network_acronym_str UCB-6
network_name_str Economic Analysis of law Review
repository_id_str
spelling The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivismThe Relevance of Empirical Findings on Voting Patterns for the Analysis of Dworkin’s Criticism of Legal PositivismDiscretion Dissent aversion Dworkin Kelsen Legal interpretation Panel effects.The article uses the literature on empirical findings on panel effects and dissent aversion in order to criticize Dworkin’s conception of legal interpretation and to support Kelsen’s theory of the legal frame and his assertion that legal interpretation consists of an act of cognition and an act of will. Dworkin’s view of discretion as usually absent from the practice of legal interpretation is confronted through the presentation and analysis of research on dissent aversion and panel effects that indicate the pervasive influence of non-legal aspects in the interpretative patterns shown by circuit court judges. The identified interpretative patterns are also referred to in order to support Kelsen’s conception of legal interpretation as involving both the identification of a legal frame and a subsequent act of will that consists of the selection that is not cognitively based of one of the available options.O artigo emprega a literatura relativa às descobertas empíricas sobre efeitos do painel e aversão ao dissenso a fim de criticar a concepção de Dworkin a respeito da interpretação do direito, bem como para apoiar a teoria de Kelsen da moldura normativa e sua afirmação de que a interpretação do direito consiste em um ato de conhecimento e em um ato de vontade. A perspectiva de Dworkin a respeito da discrição como algo que normalmente está ausente da prática da interpretação do direito é confrontada por meio da apresentação e análise das pesquisas sobre aversão ao dissenso e efeitos do painel, as quais indicam a influência generalizada de aspectos não-jurídicos nos padrões interpretativos exibidos pelos juízes dos tribunais recursais. Também são referidos os padrões interpretativos identificados a fim de apoiar a concepção de Kelsen sobre a interpretação, conforme a qual a interpretação envolve tanto a identificação da moldura normativa, quanto o ato de vontade subsequente que consiste na seleção de uma das opções disponíveis, a qual não é baseada em conhecimentos sobre estas opções.Universidade Católica de Brasília2023-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionLiterary Analysis.Avaliado por Pares; Peer Reviewedapplication/pdfhttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/1315010.31501/ealr.v13i3.13150Economic Analysis of Law Review; Vol. 13 No. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law ReviewEconomic Analysis of Law Review ; Vol. 13 Núm. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law ReviewEconomic Analysis of Law Review; v. 13 n. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law Review2178-0587reponame:Economic Analysis of law Reviewinstname:Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)instacron:UCBenghttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/13150/11540Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Reviewinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPelegrino da Silva, Matheus2023-06-15T18:39:17Zoai:ojs.portalrevistas.ucb.br:article/13150Revistahttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/ealrONGhttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/oaieditor.ealr@gmail.com||sdi@ucb.br||benjaminm.tabak@gmail.com2178-05872178-0587opendoar:2023-06-15T18:39:17Economic Analysis of law Review - Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
The Relevance of Empirical Findings on Voting Patterns for the Analysis of Dworkin’s Criticism of Legal Positivism
title The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
spellingShingle The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
Pelegrino da Silva, Matheus
Discretion
Dissent aversion
Dworkin
Kelsen
Legal interpretation
Panel effects.
title_short The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
title_full The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
title_fullStr The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
title_full_unstemmed The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
title_sort The relevance of empirical findings on voting patterns for the analysis of dworkin’s criticism of legal positivism
author Pelegrino da Silva, Matheus
author_facet Pelegrino da Silva, Matheus
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pelegrino da Silva, Matheus
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Discretion
Dissent aversion
Dworkin
Kelsen
Legal interpretation
Panel effects.
topic Discretion
Dissent aversion
Dworkin
Kelsen
Legal interpretation
Panel effects.
description The article uses the literature on empirical findings on panel effects and dissent aversion in order to criticize Dworkin’s conception of legal interpretation and to support Kelsen’s theory of the legal frame and his assertion that legal interpretation consists of an act of cognition and an act of will. Dworkin’s view of discretion as usually absent from the practice of legal interpretation is confronted through the presentation and analysis of research on dissent aversion and panel effects that indicate the pervasive influence of non-legal aspects in the interpretative patterns shown by circuit court judges. The identified interpretative patterns are also referred to in order to support Kelsen’s conception of legal interpretation as involving both the identification of a legal frame and a subsequent act of will that consists of the selection that is not cognitively based of one of the available options.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-06-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Literary Analysis.
Avaliado por Pares; Peer Reviewed
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/13150
10.31501/ealr.v13i3.13150
url https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/13150
identifier_str_mv 10.31501/ealr.v13i3.13150
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/13150/11540
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Review
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Review
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Católica de Brasília
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Católica de Brasília
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Economic Analysis of Law Review; Vol. 13 No. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law Review
Economic Analysis of Law Review ; Vol. 13 Núm. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law Review
Economic Analysis of Law Review; v. 13 n. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law Review
2178-0587
reponame:Economic Analysis of law Review
instname:Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)
instacron:UCB
instname_str Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)
instacron_str UCB
institution UCB
reponame_str Economic Analysis of law Review
collection Economic Analysis of law Review
repository.name.fl_str_mv Economic Analysis of law Review - Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv editor.ealr@gmail.com||sdi@ucb.br||benjaminm.tabak@gmail.com
_version_ 1798675421113352192

Registros relacionados