|Abstract||The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller constitutionalized the right of self-defense, and described self-defense as a natural, inherent right. Analysis of natural law in Heller shows why Justice Stevens' dissent is clearly incorrect, and illuminates a crucial weakness in Justice Breyer's dissent. The constitutional recognition of the natural law right of self-defense has important implications for American law, and for foreign and international law.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
David VanDrunen (2006). Medieval Natural Law and the Reformation. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 80 (1):77-98.
Mark C. Murphy (2006). Natural Law in Jurisprudence and Politics. Cambridge University Press.
C. Fred Alford (2010). Narrative, Nature, and the Natural Law: From Aquinas to International Human Rights. Palgrave Macmillan.
Owen J. Anderson (2012). The Natural Moral Law: The Good After Modernity. Cambridge University Press.
J. Budziszewski (2011). The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction. Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
Wolfgang Friedmann (1964). An Analysis of "in Defense of Natural Law". In Sidney Hook (ed.), Law and Philosophy. [New York]New York University Press.
Ellen Frankel, Fred Dycus Miller & Jeffrey Paul (eds.) (2000). Natural Law and Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
William H. Wilcox (2001). Robert P. George, In Defense of Natural Law:In Defense of Natural Law. Ethics 112 (1):148-151.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #131,679 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?