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

Authors

  • Matheus Pelegrino da Silva FEEVALE University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31501/ealr.v13i3.13150

Abstract

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.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Matheus Pelegrino da Silva, FEEVALE University

Professor adjunto na Faculdade de Direito da FEEVALE. Doutor em Direito pela Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg e doutor em Filosofia pela UNISINOS.

Downloads

Published

2023-06-01

Issue

Vol. 13 No. 3 (2022): Economic Analysis of Law Review

Section

Papers

License

The submission of a paper to Economic Analysis of Law Review implies the transfer, by the author(s), to the Catholic University of Brasília (UCB), of the aforementioned work for purposes of reproduction, dissemination, distribution, printing, publication and availability.

This journal offers immediate free access to its content, following the principle that making scientific knowledge freely available to the public provides greater global democratization of knowledge.

Authors who submit manuscripts for publication in EALR irrevocably agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright but grant Economic Analysis of Law Review the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Commons Attribution-Share License, after publication, allowing the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors and EALR are authorized to sign additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., publish in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal webpage) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase impact and citation of the published work (see The Effect of Open Access).