What justifies a theory of legal interpretation?
Prof. David Plunkett | Dartmouth College
Many contemporary political debates are bound up with questions about the law; about what the law is, as well as what it should be. For example: within the USA, many people (including many Supreme Court justices) think that American law should be interpreted in accordance with the “original meaning” of legal texts, including that of the American constitution. Others strongly disagree. Many of them instead think that facts about the intent of the law, or our current moral and political goals, should play a role here too.
How should we best understand such debates about legal interpretation? What would justify one view here rather than another? This talk will explore these and other foundational questions about legal interpretation. In so doing, it will engage with a range of questions about the nature of law, morality, and political disagreement.
ABOUT THE SPEAKER:
David Plunkett is a Professor in the Philosophy Department at Dartmouth College. His core areas of current research include ethics (especially metaethics), philosophy of law, philosophy of language, philosophical methodology, epistemology, and social/political philosophy. In recent years, he has been a visitor at the Wissenschaftskolleg (Institute for Advanced Study) in Berlin, Stanford University, Princeton University, the University of Oslo, and the University of Oxford.
Images: Sebastian Pichler, Unsplash
