Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Judicial_interpretation> ?p ?o }
Showing triples 1 to 77 of
77
with 100 triples per page.
- Judicial_interpretation abstract "Judicial interpretation is a theory or mode of thought that explains how the judiciary should interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation (see statutory interpretation). This is a substantive issue in the United States to a greater extent than in other nations because the nation's highest court, the Supreme Court, has the power to overturn laws made by the legislature in a process called judicial review. In effect, the court can decide such matters as the legality of slavery as in the Dred Scott decision, as desegregation as in the Brown v Board of Education decision, and abortion rights as in the Roe v Wade decision. As a result, how justices interpret the constitution, and the ways in which they approach this task, has a political component. While terms such as \"judicial conservatism\" can lead to confusion, since the meaning depends on what is trying to be \"conserved\", one can look at judicial interpretation along a spectrum: when judges actively change the law to veer decidedly from previous judgments, it can be construed as judicial activism, and when they act to maintain past rulings, it can be construed as judicial restraint. In the United States, there are various methods of constitutional interpretation: Textualism involves judges consulting the actual language of the Constitution first, and perhaps last, according to government scholar John E. Finn, who added that the method has an \"obvious appeal\" for its simplicity but can be hampered when the language of the Constitution itself is ambiguous. Strict constructionism involves judges interpreting the text only as it is spoken; once a clear meaning has been established, there is no need for further analysis, and judges should avoid drawing inferences from previous statutes or the constitution and instead focus on exactly what was written. For example, Justice Hugo Black argued that the First Amendment's wording in reference to certain civil rights that Congress shall make no law should mean exactly that: no law, no exceptions. Founders' Intent involves judges trying to gauge the intentions of the authors of the Constitution. Problems can arise when judges try to determine which particular Founders or Framers to consult, as well as trying to determine what they meant based on often sparse and incomplete documentation. Originalism involves judges trying to apply the \"original\" meanings of various constitutional provisions. For example, Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia believed that the constitution should \"mean the same thing in 2013 as its writers intended in 1787\". Balancing happens when judges weigh one set of interests or rights against an opposing set, typically used to make rulings in First Amendment cases. This approach was criticized by Supreme Court justice Felix Frankfurter who argued that the Constitution gives no guidance about how to weigh or measure divergent interests. Prudentialism discourages judges from setting broad rules for possible future cases, and advises courts to play a limited role. Doctrinalism considers how various parts of the Constitution have been \"shaped by the Court's own jurisprudence\", according to Finn. Precedent is judges deciding a case by looking to the decision of a previous and similar case according to stare decisis, and finding a rule or principle in the earlier case to guide the current case. Structuralism is a method judges use by finding the meaning of a particular constitutional principle only by \"reading it against the larger constitutional document or context,\" according to Finn. Functionalism.↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 ↑ ↑".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageID "30870726".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageLength "5449".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageOutDegree "35".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageRevisionID "706105829".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Antonin_Scalia.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Brown_v._Board_of_Education.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Category:Interpretation_(philosophy).
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Category:Judiciaries.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Category:Legal_reasoning.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Constitution.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Constitutional_economics.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Constitutionalism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Dred_Scott_v._Sandford.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Felix_Frankfurter.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Hugo_Black.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Judicial_activism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Judicial_restraint.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Judicial_review.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Judiciary.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Jurisprudence.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Law.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Legal_interpretation_in_South_Africa.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Legislation.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Originalism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Precedent.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Prudentialism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Roe_v._Wade.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Rule_according_to_higher_law.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Separation_of_powers.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Statutory_interpretation.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Strict_constructionism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Structuralism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink Textualism.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLink United_States.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "Judicial interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "Legal interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "broadly interpreted".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "commentator".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "constitutional interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpret".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpretation by courts".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpretation of laws".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpretation of the law".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpreting the law".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "interpretive".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "judicial interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "judicial review skeptic".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "judicial".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "legal interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageWikiLinkText "theory of legal interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Citation_needed.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Judicial_interpretation.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Jurisprudence.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Reflist.
- Judicial_interpretation wikiPageUsesTemplate Template:Wikiquote-inline.
- Judicial_interpretation subject Category:Interpretation_(philosophy).
- Judicial_interpretation subject Category:Judiciaries.
- Judicial_interpretation subject Category:Legal_reasoning.
- Judicial_interpretation hypernym Theory.
- Judicial_interpretation type Work.
- Judicial_interpretation type Concept.
- Judicial_interpretation comment "Judicial interpretation is a theory or mode of thought that explains how the judiciary should interpret the law, particularly constitutional documents and legislation (see statutory interpretation). This is a substantive issue in the United States to a greater extent than in other nations because the nation's highest court, the Supreme Court, has the power to overturn laws made by the legislature in a process called judicial review.".
- Judicial_interpretation label "Judicial interpretation".
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs Q1331848.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs Interpretación_judicial.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs פרשנות_(משפט).
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs 법의_해석.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs m.04qlfs.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs Judicial_interpretation.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs Lagtolkning.
- Judicial_interpretation sameAs Q1331848.
- Judicial_interpretation wasDerivedFrom Judicial_interpretation?oldid=706105829.
- Judicial_interpretation isPrimaryTopicOf Judicial_interpretation.