Legal Interpretivism
Legal content depends on the principles that best fit and justify a community’s legal practice.
What it claims
Dworkin’s legal interpretivism starts from difficult cases where explicit rules do not settle the outcome. Judges continue to argue about what the law is, rather than openly treating every such decision as unconstrained new legislation. Interpretation must fit statutes, precedents, and constitutional practice while offering their best moral justification.
Nearby positions
Goes together with
Opposed to
Key thinkers
Ronald Dworkin · Nicos Stavropoulos · Stephen Guest · Scott Hershovitz