Abstract
In Law's Empire, Ronald Dworkin advances two incompatible versions of law as integrity. On the strong thesis, political integrity understood as coherence in fundamental moral principles constitutes an overriding constraint on justice, fairness and due process. On the weak thesis, political integrity, while a value, is not to be privileged over justice, fairness, and due process, but to be weighed along with them. I argue that the weak thesis is superior on both of Dworkin's criteria: fit and justifiability. However, the weak thesis must be amended to allow for coherence in policies as well as in principles: the social consequences of legal decisions must be taken into account.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I would like to thank Kenneth Kiprnis for his helpful comments on earlier drafts.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Peerenboom, R.P. A coup d'état in law's empire: Dworkin's Hercules meets Atlas. Law Philos 9, 95–113 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00147045
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00147045