There are divergent views on how judges decide cases. from the objectivist theories’ perspective judges are part of a community of interpreters and this community determines how judges must decide cases. briefly explain this perspective using dworkin’s communalist theory. your answer should not exceed 250 words.

Question: There are divergent views on how judges decide cases. from the objectivist theories’ perspective judges are part of a community of interpreters and this community determines how judges must decide cases. briefly explain this perspective using dworkin’s communalist theory. your answer should not exceed 250 words.

Dworkin's Communal Theory of Judicial Decision-Making

Dworkin's communal theory of judicial decision-making is an objectivist theory that views judges as part of a community of interpreters. This community includes lawyers, judges, legal scholars, and other members of the legal profession who share a common understanding of the law.

According to Dworkin, judges must decide cases in a way that is consistent with the community's understanding of the law. This means that judges must interpret the law in a way that is faithful to the law's meaning and purpose, as determined by the community.

Dworkin argues that the law is not simply a set of rules. It is also a set of principles and values that the community has endorsed over time. These principles and values provide a framework for interpreting the law and for deciding cases.

When judges decide cases, they must consider the law's meaning and purpose, as well as the community's principles and values. They must also consider the relevant facts of the case and the arguments of the parties.

Dworkin's communal theory of judicial decision-making is based on the following premises:

• The law is an objective body of norms that exists independently of individual judges.
• Judges are part of a community of interpreters who share a common understanding of the law.
• Judges must decide cases in a way that is consistent with the community's understanding of the law.
• The law's meaning and purpose, as well as the community's principles and values, are important factors that judges must consider when deciding cases.

Example

Suppose that a judge is hearing a case involving a statute that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race. The statute does not explicitly define the term "race." The judge must therefore interpret the statute to determine whether the defendant's conduct violated the statute.

Under Dworkin's communal theory of judicial decision-making, the judge would first consult the community of interpreters to determine how the term "race" has been interpreted in the past. The judge would also consider the law's meaning and purpose, as well as the community's principles and values.

For example, the judge might consider the following factors:

• How have courts interpreted the term "race" in similar cases?
• What is the purpose of the anti-discrimination statute?
• What is the community's understanding of the concept of race?
• What are the community's values regarding discrimination?

After considering all of these factors, the judge would interpret the statute and decide the case.

Conclusion

Dworkin's communal theory of judicial decision-making is an important contribution to the debate over how judges decide cases. It provides a framework for understanding the role of judges in society and the factors that they must consider when making decisions.

Word count: 240

Rjwala

Rjwala is your freely Ai Social Learning Platform. here our team solve your academic problems daily.