1984•Anglo-American Law ReviewRequires access

Rights Theories in the American Constitutional Tradition

James Friedman

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

After nearly two centuries of American constitutional law judges and scholars continue to disagree as to the nature and source of constitutional rights. Thus there is also disagreement as to the nature of the judicial task in constitutional cases. In this paper I identify three basic approaches to constitutional rights: The textualist theory supposes that judges can resolve constitutional disputes by relying upon the text of the constitution. The traditionalist theory asserts that political and cultural traditions are the true sources of constitutional rights. And the rationalist theory of rights states that we must fashion our constitutional liberties from our own moral and political theories. I argue that the textualist theory is untenable and that the traditionalist theory is ill-defined. The rationalist theory is coherent, but sheds no light upon the necessary choice of a particular moral or political theory.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

After nearly two centuries of American constitutional law judges and scholars continue to disagree as to the nature and source of constitutional rights. Thus there is also disagreement as to the nature of the judicial task in constitutional cases. In this paper I identify three basic approaches to constitutional rights: The textualist theory supposes that judges can resolve constitutional disputes by relying upon the text of the constitution. The traditionalist theory asserts that political and cultural traditions are the true sources of constitutional rights. And the rationalist theory of rights states that we must fashion our constitutional liberties from our own moral and political theories. I argue that the textualist theory is untenable and that the traditionalist theory is ill-defined. The rationalist theory is coherent, but sheds no light upon the necessary choice of a particular moral or political theory.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

After nearly two centuries of American constitutional law judges and scholars continue to disagree as to the nature and source of constitutional rights. Thus there is also disagreement as to the nature of the judicial task in constitutional cases. In this paper I identify three basic approaches to constitutional rights: The textualist theory supposes that judges can resolve constitutional disputes by relying upon the text of the constitution. The traditionalist theory asserts that political and cultural traditions are the true sources of constitutional rights. And the rationalist theory of rights states that we must fashion our constitutional liberties from our own moral and political theories. I argue that the textualist theory is untenable and that the traditionalist theory is ill-defined. The rationalist theory is coherent, but sheds no light upon the necessary choice of a particular moral or political theory.

Key concepts: Constitutional theory, Constitution, Law, Constitutional law, Constitutional economics, Politics, Political science, Political philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Rights Theories in the American Constitutional Tradition — Research Paper | ScholarLens