12 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Jeffrey Goldsworthy [11]Jeffrey D. Goldsworthy [1]
  1. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (2013). Legislative Intention Vindicated? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 33 (4):821-842.
    This review article examines Richard Ekins’ attempt to defend the concept of legislative intention from influential criticism, and to demonstrate its indispensable and central role in statutory interpretation. He rejects accounts of legislative intention in terms of the aggregation of the intentions of individual legislators, and instead, draws on recent philosophical work on the nature of group agency to propose a unitary model, in which the relevant intention is that of the legislature itself, although it is supported by the ‘interlocking’ (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (2012). Balkin , Jack . Constitutional Redemption . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011. Pp. 304. $35.00 (Cloth). Balkin , Jack . Living Originalism . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011. Pp. 480. $35.00 (Cloth). [REVIEW] Ethics 122 (4):785-790.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (2011). The Case for Originalism. In Grant Huscroft & Bradley W. Miller (eds.), The Challenge of Originalism: Essays in Constitutional Theory. Cambridge University Press.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (2009). Constitutional Interpretation: Originalism. Philosophy Compass 4 (4):682-702.
    Constitutional interpretation is problematic because it can be difficult to distinguish legitimate interpretation from illegitimate change. The distinction depends largely on what a constitution is. A constitution, like any other law, necessarily has a meaning, which pre-exists judicial interpretation: it is not a set of meaningless marks on paper. Any plausible constitutional theory must offer an account of the nature of that meaning. In doing so, it must address two main questions. The first is whether the meaning of the constitution (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Tom Campbell, Jeffrey Goldsworthy & Adrienne Stone (eds.) (2003). Protecting Human Rights: Instruments and Institutions. OUP Oxford.
    This volume addresses two important issues surrounding human rights in both law and politics. First, it considers the content and form of human rights. What is and what is not to be counted as a human right, and what does it mean to identify a right as a human right? Secondly it considers the implementation of human rights. What are the most effective and legitimate means of promoting human rights? Both of these issues raise profound moral questions within legal and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (2003). Judicial Review, Legislative Override, and Democracy. In Tom Campbell, Jeffrey Goldsworthy & Adrienne Stone (eds.), Protecting Human Rights: Instruments and Institutions. Oup Oxford.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (1995). Marmor on Meaning, Interpretation, and Legislative Intention. Legal Theory 1 (4):439-464.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (1995). Some Scepticism About Moral Realism. Law and Philosophy 14 (3/4):357 - 374.
    The lesson is that while externalists avoid devastating objections to internalist moral realism, they thereby sacrifice most of thepractical significance of moral realism as an alternative to noncognitivism. They defend the objectivity of moral beliefs, but are forced to concede that the practical relevance and appeal of those beliefs depends on subjective desires. It is because they correctly reject internalism that they succumb to the non-cognitivists'tu quoque.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (1993). Is Jurisprudence Liberal Ideology? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 13 (4):548-570.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (1992). Externalism, Internalism and Moral Scepticism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 70 (1):40 – 60.
    In "Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics", David Brink defendsexternalist moral realism against Mackie's sceptical arguments, whichpresuppose some kind of internalism. But Brink confuses the issues by failing to distinguish different kinds of internalism. What he calls conceptual internalism may be false, but Mackie can retreat to sociological internalism, which holds that most people believe moral requirements to be capable of motivating action regardless of pre-existing desires. Brink does not challenge that thesis, which isall that Mackie's sceptical arguments necessarily (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Jeffrey Goldsworthy (1992). Well-Being and Value. Utilitas 4 (01):1-.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Jeffrey D. Goldsworthy (1990). The Self-Destruction of Legal Positivism. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 10 (4):449-486.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation