國立高雄大學圖資館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

圖資館首頁

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Natural Law in American Jurisprudenc...

Boston University.

Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny.
作者:	Mock, Douglas S.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017
面頁冊數:	222 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-08(E), Section: A.
附註:	Adviser: Judith A. Swanson.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International79-08A(E).
標題:	Political science.
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10623449
ISBN:	9780355684643

Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny.
Mock, Douglas S.

Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 222 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-08(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University, 2017.

This dissertation seeks to answer the question of whether and to what extent principles of natural law have figured in Supreme Court jurisprudence in the last two centuries. In the last quarter-century, scholars and judicial analysts have displayed a renewed interest in natural law reasoning and whether justices do or should take cognizance of natural law considerations. The issue became prominent during the 1991 confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas, who had written and spoken favorably of natural law as a guiding principle in constitutional adjudication.

ISBN: 9780355684643Subjects--Topical Terms:

174710
Political science.

Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny.
LDR:03355nmm a2200349 4500 001 523947
005 20180517120325.5
008 180709s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780355684643
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10623449
035 $a (MiAaPQ)bu:13336
035 $a AAI10623449
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Mock, Douglas S. $3 795444
245 1 0 $a Natural Law in American Jurisprudence: Calder v. Bull and Corfield v. Coryell and Their Progeny.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 222 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-08(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Judith A. Swanson.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University, 2017.
520 $a This dissertation seeks to answer the question of whether and to what extent principles of natural law have figured in Supreme Court jurisprudence in the last two centuries. In the last quarter-century, scholars and judicial analysts have displayed a renewed interest in natural law reasoning and whether justices do or should take cognizance of natural law considerations. The issue became prominent during the 1991 confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas, who had written and spoken favorably of natural law as a guiding principle in constitutional adjudication.
520 $a Two cases and their progeny figure herein. In Calder v. Bull (1798), Supreme Court Justices Samuel Chase and James Iredell discussed whether principles of natural justice placed limits on legislatures beyond which they could not go, or whether judges could rely only on specific constitutional restraints in evaluating legislative acts. In Corfield v. Coryell (1823), Justice Bushrod Washington explained that the Constitution's Privileges and Immunities Clause protects those rights that are "fundamental," and many subsequent commentators and courts have given this statement a natural rights gloss.
520 $a This work contributes to existing Supreme Court literature by tracing the entire history of Calder and Corfield, the two cases most frequently cited for potentially having natural law implications. The paper considers each citation as it is relevant to the natural law debate; cases are excluded only because they are cited for another point. For example, cases that cite Calder for its holding that the Constitution's Ex Post Facto clause only applies to criminal cases are not considered.
520 $a The paper concludes that natural law considerations now figure in Supreme Court jurisprudence only in a mediated sense. While several Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century opinions, including Corfield itself, accept natural law principles as interpretative guides, natural law as a free-standing source of adjudication has faded from Supreme Court jurisprudence. Concomitantly, the Privileges and Immunities Clause as a source of rights has been largely discarded in favor of a substantive due-process jurisprudence, with the Court adopting a gradual, common-law type of approach in determining the constitutional limits of government interference with Americans' rights.
590 $a School code: 0017.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 174710
650 4 $a Law. $3 207600
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 176573
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0422
710 2 $a Boston University. $b Political Science. $3 795445
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 79-08A(E).
790 $a 0017
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10623449