Subscribe to get Parts 1 and 2 ad-free, plus a supporter exclusive Part 3. Continuing from part one on Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992) and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2021) decision featuring guest Robin Linsenmayer. Dworkin thinks that the distinction between enumerated and unenumerated rights Continue Reading …
Ep. 306: Dworkin and the Dobbs Decision (Part One)
Subscribe to get parts 1 and 2 of this now, ad-free. Does the U.S. Constitution guarantee the right to an abortion? Mark, Wes, Dylan, and Seth are joined by lawyer/sister Robin Linsenmayer to discuss Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2021) and Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992). We previously considered Continue Reading …
Ep. 306: Dworkin and the Dobbs Decision (Part Two for Supporters)
Continuing from part one on Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992) and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2021) decision featuring guest Robin Linsenmayer. Dworkin thinks that the distinction between enumerated and unenumerated rights really doesn't make sense. All legal language is vague and requires Continue Reading …
Ep. 306: Dworkin and the Dobbs Decision (Part One for Supporters)
Does the U.S. Constitution guarantee the right to an abortion? Mark, Wes, Dylan, and Seth are joined by lawyer/sister Robin Linsenmayer to discuss Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2021) and Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992). We previously considered Dworkin's take on what judges do when law is ambiguous. Continue Reading …
Ep. 304: Dworkin v. Hart on Legal Judgment (Part One)
Subscribe to get parts 1 and 2 of this now, ad-free. On Ronald Dworkin's "The Model of Rules" (1967) and Scott J. Shapiro's "The 'Hart-Dworkin' Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed" (2007). How do judges make decisions in hard cases? When the law "runs out" and doesn't definitively decide, e.g., whether we have a general "right of privacy," do judges then just draw Continue Reading …
Ep. 304: Dworkin v. Hart on Legal Judgment (Part Two for Supporters)
Continuing from part one on Roland Dworkin's "The Model of Rules" (1967) and Scott J. Shapiro's "The 'Hart-Dworkin' Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed" (2007), plus some of Dworkin's "Hard Cases" (1977). We go through some responses by Hartians to Dworkin's initial attack, revisiting the issue of whether judges can employ moral considerations when making decisions, or Continue Reading …
Ep. 304: Dworkin v. Hart on Legal Judgment (Part One for Supporters)
On Ronald Dworkin's "The Model of Rules" (1967) and Scott J. Shapiro's "The 'Hart-Dworkin' Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed" (2007). How do judges make decisions in hard cases? When the law "runs out" and doesn't definitively decide, e.g., whether we have a general "right of privacy," do judges then just draw on their personal moral judgment in deciding cases? And if Continue Reading …
Dworkin on Defining the Good Life
Mark's posts on Frithjof Bergmann help lay the groundwork for the upcoming episode on Montaigne and what constitutes the "good life." Coincidentally, there's a similarly-themed article by Ronald Dworkin in this month's New York Review of Books. I may disagree with Mark's conclusions, and maybe even some of his premises. But I better appreciate Mark's approach after reading Continue Reading …