Presentation Type
Textual Analysis
Release Option
Event
Description
.
Abstract
In recent times, it has become more apparent not just to legal professionals, but the public as well, that the United States legal system is in disarray. The public perception of the Supreme Court is facing an all-time low and many are beginning to question whether the Court is relevant anymore. In this essay, I will first reconstruct Jeremy Waldron’s philosophical piece, "The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review," and address the issues that he, and many other individuals who oppose judicial review, find with the outcomes and processes of the Court. Thereafter, I will argue that judicial review is worth salvaging, even though it has problems, while engaging with Cristina LaFont’s piece, "The Philosophical Foundations for Judicial Review." I will conclude the essay with my own philosophical account of judicial review to further the conversation about the necessity of the Court.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Digital Commons@Georgia Southern License.
Faculty Mentor
Dr. Paul Tubig
Department of Primary Presenter's Major
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies
Location
Room 1012
Symposium Year
2023
The Supreme Court on Trial
Room 1012
In recent times, it has become more apparent not just to legal professionals, but the public as well, that the United States legal system is in disarray. The public perception of the Supreme Court is facing an all-time low and many are beginning to question whether the Court is relevant anymore. In this essay, I will first reconstruct Jeremy Waldron’s philosophical piece, "The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review," and address the issues that he, and many other individuals who oppose judicial review, find with the outcomes and processes of the Court. Thereafter, I will argue that judicial review is worth salvaging, even though it has problems, while engaging with Cristina LaFont’s piece, "The Philosophical Foundations for Judicial Review." I will conclude the essay with my own philosophical account of judicial review to further the conversation about the necessity of the Court.
