OALib Journal期刊
Law and Politics: Montesquieu and the 4 Schools of Legal Theory
DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1104092
Subject Areas:
Politics
Keywords: Montesquieu , Natural Law , Legal Positivism , Legal Realism , Legal Pragmatism
Abstract
The theory of separation of powers in the state by
Montesquieu (1748) is the longest serving theory in real politics, maintaining
its relevance for more than 200 hundred years. Most constitutions in written
form follow his parad igm, at least from a formal point of view. Constitutional
democracies certainly apply or enforce Montesquieu’s ideal-type for rule of law
and political stability. How does this great political theory fit with the
major schools in jurisprudence about what is law and the role of judges in
adjudication? This question has never been raised, but it is as essential to
Montesquieu’s paradigm as the changing relations between executive and
legislature in for instance parliamentarism and presidentialism.
Cite this paper
Lane, J. (2017). Law and Politics: Montesquieu and the 4 Schools of Legal Theory. Open Access Library Journal , 4, e4092. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1104092 .
References
[1 ] Montesquieu (1989) The Spirit of the Laws. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [2 ] Shklar, J. (1987) Montesquieu. OUP, Oxford. [3 ] Gordon, S. (2005) Montesquieu: The French Philosopher Who Shaped Modern Government. Rosen Central, New York. [4 ] Simmons, N. (2008) Central Issues in Jurisprudence. Sweet and Maxwell, London. [5 ] Finnis, J. (2011) Natural Law and Natural Rights. Clarendon, Oxford. [6 ] Paine, T. (2017) Rights of Man. Createspace Independent, London. [7 ] Long, A.A. and Sedley, D.N. (2012) The Hellenistic Philosophers III. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [8 ] Baltzly, D. (2014) Stoicism. In: Zalta, E.N., Ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition). [9 ] Grotius, H. (1625) On Laws in War and Peace. Chap II. [10 ] Dworkin, R. (1977) Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. [11 ] Dworkin, R. (1988) Law’s Empire. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA. [12 ] Dworkin, R. (2011) Justice for Hedgehogs. Harvard UP, Cambridge, MA. [13 ] Kelsen, H. (1957) What Is Justice? What Is Justice? University of California Press, Berkeley. [14 ] Raz, J. (1979) The Authority of Law. Clarendon Press, Oxford. [15 ] Kramer, M. (1999) In Defense of Legal Positivism: Law without Trimmings. Clarendon Press, Oxford. [16 ] Posmer, R.A. (1996) Overcoming Law. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. [17 ] Dworkin, R. (2002) Sovereign Virtue. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. [18 ] Kelsen, H. (1960, 2017) Reine Rechtslehre. [Pure Theory of Law.] Mohr Siebeck, Tuebingen. [19 ] Hart, H.L.A. (1994) The Concept of Law. 2nd Edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford. [20 ] Kelsen, H. (1960) General Theory of Law and State. Harvard U.P., Cambridge. [21 ] Kelsen, H. (1979) Theorie Generale des Normes. [General Theory of Norms.] Manz Verlag. Kramer, M.H., Vienna. [22 ] Posner, R.A. (1992) The Problems of Jurisprudence. Harvard U.P., Cambridge. [23 ] Posner, R.A. (1999) The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. [24 ] Waluchow, W.J. (1994) Inclusive Legal Positivism. Clarendon Press, Oxford. [25 ] Haegerstroen, A. (1953) Inquiries into the Nature of Law and Morals. Almqvist & Wicksell, Stockholm. [26 ] Ross, A. (1934) Virkelighed og Gyldighed i Retslaeren. [Reality and Validity in Legal Doctrine.] Levin & Munksgaard, Kobenhavn. [27 ] Eckhoff, T. (1974) Justice: Its Determinants in Social Interaction. Rotterdam University Press, Rotterdam. [28 ] Hedenius, I. (1942) Om raett och moral. [On Law and Morals.] Stockholm. [29 ] Olivecrona, K. (1939) Law as Fact. Oxford University Press, London. [30 ] Hohhfeld, W.N. (1913) Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning. 23 Yale Law Journal, 16. [31 ] Simmonds, N.E. and Steiner, H. (2000) A Debate over Rights: Philosophical Inquiries. Oxford University Press, Oxford. [32 ] Campbell, D. and Thomas, P. (2016) Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning by Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld. Rouledge, London. [33 ] Cooter, R. and Ulen, T. (2012) Law and Economics. Addison-Wesley, New York. [34 ] Brennan, G. and Buchanan, J.M. (1985) The Reason of Rules: Constitutional Political Economy. Liberty Fund, Washington DC. [35 ] Posner, R.A. (2008) How Judges Think. Harvard U.P., Cambridge. [36 ] Posner, R.A. (2004) Frontiers of Legal Theory. Harvard U.P., Cambridge. [37 ] Weber, M. (1079) Economy and Society III. University of California Press, Berkeley. [38 ] Waldron, J. (1999) Law and Disagreement. Oxford U.P., Oxford. [39 ] Weber, M. (1904) Die ‘Objektivitat’ sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis. [The “Objectivity” of Knowledge in Social Science and Social Policy.] Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, 19, 22-87. [40 ] Ross, A. (1966) Om ret og retferdighed. [On Law and Justice.] Nyt Nordisk Forlag Arnold Busk, Kobenhavn, The Lawbook Exchange, London. [41 ] Stanziani, A. (2014) After Oriental Despotism. Bloomsbury Academic, London.
Full-Text
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
comments powered by
Contact Us
service@oalib.com
QQ:3279437679
WhatsApp +8615387084133
WeChat 1538708413
