masthead


  NELLCO Repository Home

Customized Email Alerts by Subject Area

Search

My Account

NELLCO Home



poweredbybepress

 

logo

Available Papers  •  University of Pennsylvania Law School Web Site  •  Search the Collection  •  Policies
NELLCO LSR > UPENN > WPS bealert

Constitutional Fidelity, The Rule of Recognition, and the Communitarian Turn In Contemporary Positivism
Matthew D. Adler, University of Pennsylvania Law School

Download the Paper (PDF format) - April 1, 2006 Tell a colleague about it.
Printing Tips: Select 'print as image' in the Acrobat print dialog if you have trouble printing.

ABSTRACT:

Contemporary positivism has taken a communitarian turn. Hart, in the Postscript to the Concept of Law, clarifies that the rule of recognition is a special sort of social practice: a convention. It is not clear whether Hart, here, means “convention” in the strict sense elaborated by David Lewis, or in some weaker sense. A number of contemporary positivists, including Jules Coleman (at one point), Andrei Marmor, and Gerald Postema, have argued that the rule of recognition is something like a Lewis-convention. Others have suggested that the rule of recognition is conventional in a weaker sense -- specifically, by figuring in a “shared cooperative activity” (SCA) among officials. Chris Kutz, Scott Shapiro, and Jules Coleman (more recently) have adopted this model. This Article criticizes the Lewis-convention and SCA models of the rule of recognition, drawing on U.S. constitutional theory. Imagine a society of U.S. officials who are committed to the text of the 1787 Constitution in a strong form: each official would continue to accept the text as supreme law even if every other official defected to an alternative text, and no official is prepared to bargain or negotiate with the others about the supremacy of the text. The social practice among these officials is neither a Lewis-convention (since there is no alternative text to which every official would shift if every other official did), nor an SCA (since the officials have no general intention to “mesh” their conceptions of legal validity with each other, and in particular have no intention to compromise with officials who deny the supremacy of the 1787 text).

Therefore, under the Lewis-convention and SCA models, a hypothetical society of U.S. officials who are committed, first and foremost, to the 1787 text rather than to the community of officials, is not a full-fledged legal system. But this is deeply counterintuitive. The hypothetical society simply embodies, in a particularly pure form, an attitude of fidelity to the 1787 text that many officials and citizens currently profess. The tension between the Lewis-convention and SCA models of the rule of recognition, and constitutional fidelity, points the way to a different model of the rule of recognition: namely, that the rule of recognition is a social norm.

SUGGESTED CITATION:
Matthew D. Adler, "Constitutional Fidelity, The Rule of Recognition, and the Communitarian Turn In Contemporary Positivism" (April 1, 2006). University of Pennsylvania Law School. Scholarship at Penn Law. Paper 91.
http://lsr.nellco.org/upenn/wps/papers/91




REPOSITORY HOME  | SEARCH  | MY ACCOUNT  | NELLCO HOME |
Powered by bepress.