Publication Date

Summer 1986

Journal

Georgia Law Review

Abstract

The article explores the evolving dialogue between legal scholars and literary theorists, particularly focusing on how judicial opinions can be viewed as narrative fictions. It challenges traditional notions of textual autonomy in legal interpretation, suggesting that meaning is not fixed but is shaped by subjective readings. The analysis critiques the dichotomy between interpretivism and noninterpretivism, arguing that both approaches are inherently subjective. Drawing on historical and structural interpretations of the Constitution, the article advocates for a balanced approach that considers both textual integrity and communal values, emphasizing that constitutional truths are embedded within societal ideas rather than being strictly majoritarian or textual.

Volume

20

Issue

4

First Page

939

Last Page

994

Publisher

University of Georgia School of Law

Disciplines

Contracts | Courts | Judges | Jurisprudence | Law

Comments

The Constitution and Human Values: The Unfinished Agenda

Share

COinS