|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)|
|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.
Ellen Frankel, Fred Dycus Miller & Jeffrey Paul (eds.) (2000). Natural Law and Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Wolfgang Friedmann (1964). An Analysis of "in Defense of Natural Law". In Sidney Hook (ed.), Law and Philosophy. [New York]New York University Press.
J. Budziszewski (2011). The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction. Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
Owen J. Anderson (2012). The Natural Moral Law: The Good After Modernity. Cambridge University Press.
C. Fred Alford (2010). Narrative, Nature, and the Natural Law: From Aquinas to International Human Rights. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mark C. Murphy (2006). Natural Law in Jurisprudence and Politics. 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 downloads7 ( #133,421 of 549,049 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,049 )
How can I increase my downloads?