“Sometimes a case is referred to as ‘canonical’. It is one of the cases that is clearly correct. Brown v Board is frequently cited as a canonical case. Other times, the opposite point is made: a case is call ‘anti-canonical’. It is clearly wrong. An example is Lochner v New York. But what is the theoretical force of these moves? And what accounts for the canonical or anti-canonical status of a case? Do cases move in and out of the canon and anti-canon? How and why? …” (more)
[Lawrence Solum, Legal Theory Blog, 29 November]
First posted 2020-11-29 17:43:01
Leave a Reply