How should courts interpret the law? Strictly according to the text? By lawmakers’ original intent? By the needs of today’s society? Philosophical ideals? In this talk and Q&A, Tara Smith, professor of philosophy and BB&T Chair for the Study of Objectivism at the University of Texas - Austin, argues that the best laws in the world are useless if misunderstood – yet today, the debate over proper interpretation is a minefield of loaded concepts and false alternatives.Smith’s new book, Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System, explains the pillars of proper review by grounding it in the function of an objective legal system. As the Rule of Law teeters, as presidential candidates stake radical claims about judges and the Constitution, and as issues ranging from abortion rights to medical care to war powers come before the courts, the question couldn't be more timely.
Latest
- Intellectual Activism: Track key decision-makers on Freedom To Build Legislation. Help get them to YES.
- Birds of a Collectivist Feather Flock Together
- Say Yes To Data Centers
- Verifying Universal Mail In Ballots
- Chip Joyce: Fauci Document Archive
- George Reisman: Western civilization is open to everyone
- Tracinski Loses Congressional Bid in Virginia
- Ayn Rand Institute Announces the Ayn Rand Center, a Permanent Home for the Legacy and Future of Ayn Rand’s Ideas
- Minnesota ICE Resistance: Creating a powder keg of citizen vs. federal law enforcement
- Shooting of Renee Good: Irresponsible to Immediately Proclaim This a Murder