Legal Positivism in the Case of Florida v. Jardines Open Access
Sigalow, Martin Walsh (2015)
Published
Abstract
Legal Positivism is the claim that morality need not be tied to law. There are many versions of positivism, each appealing to different conditions for their validity. One particular theory, Omega Positivism, stands out as the best of the competing theories in terms of criteria many positivists share. Florida v. Jardines is a United States Supreme Court case in Fourth Amendment law. The appropriate ruling in that case takes into account principles of political morality infused into the law, according to Omega Positivism. The majority opinion did not note those principles as meaningful, however, and remains inadequate. A truly positivist reading of that decision, that is, an Omega Positivist reading, demands a re-evaluation of that case.
Table of Contents
Introduction 1-3
Chapter One: Criteria 4-16
Chapter Two: Conceptions 17-78
Chapter Three: Cases 79-121
Conclusion 122-124
About this Honors Thesis
| School | |
|---|---|
| Department | |
| Degree | |
| Submission | |
| Language |
|
| Research Field | |
| Keyword | |
| Committee Chair / Thesis Advisor | |
| Committee Members |
Primary PDF
| Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Legal Positivism in the Case of Florida v. Jardines () | 2018-08-28 13:30:47 -0400 |
|
Supplemental Files
| Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Actions |
|---|