1.

Record Nr.

UNINA9910453810003321

Autore

Powell Jefferson <1954->

Titolo

Constitutional conscience [[electronic resource] ] : the moral dimension of judicial decision / / H. Jefferson Powell

Pubbl/distr/stampa

Chicago, : University of Chicago Press, 2008

ISBN

1-281-96624-X

9786611966249

0-226-67730-3

Descrizione fisica

1 online resource (161 p.)

Disciplina

347.73/2634

Soggetti

Judicial process - United States

Justice, Administration of - United States

Judges - United States

Judicial discretion - United States

Constitutional law - United States

Electronic books.

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Note generali

Description based upon print version of record.

Nota di bibliografia

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Nota di contenuto

The rule of five -- Playing the game -- A question of degree -- Men and women of goodwill -- Making it up as we go along.

Sommario/riassunto

While many recent observers have accused American judges-especially Supreme Court justices-of being too driven by politics and ideology, others have argued that judges are justified in using their positions to advance personal views. Advocating a different approach-one that eschews ideology but still values personal perspective-H. Jefferson Powell makes a compelling case for the centrality of individual conscience in constitutional decision making. Powell argues that almost every controversial decision has more than one constitutionally defensible resolution. In such cases, he goes on to contend, the language and ideals of the Constitution require judges to decide in good faith, exercising what Powell calls the constitutional virtues: candor, intellectual honesty, humility about the limits of constitutional adjudication, and willingness to admit that they do not have all the answers. Constitutional Conscience concludes that the need for these



qualities in judges-as well as lawyers and citizens-is implicit in our constitutional practices, and that without them judicial review would forfeit both its own integrity and the credibility of the courts themselves.