It's All in the Game : A Nonfoundationalist Account of Law and Adjudication

Three questions concerning modern legal thought provide the framework for __It’s All in the Game:__ What should judges do? What do judges do? What can judges do? Contrasting his own answers to traditional responses and moving playfully between debates of high theory, daily practices of appellate judges, and his own enlightening analyses of significant court rulings, Allan C. Hutchinson examines what it means to treat adjudication as an engaged game of rhetorical justification. His resulting argument enables the reader to grasp more fully the practical operation, political determinants, and the transformative possibilities of law and adjudication. Taking on leading contemporary theories to explore the claim that “law is politics,” Hutchinson delineates a route toward professional, relevant, and responsible—if radical—judicial practices. After discussing the difference between foundationalist, antifoundationalist, and nonfoundationalist legal critiques, he offers a focused, unequivocal, and positive account of the advantages of operating within a nonfoundationalist framework. Although such an approach centralizes the role of rhetoric in law, Hutchinson claims that this does not necessitate a turn away from politics or, more particularly, from a progressive politics. Driving home the political and jurisprudential impact of his critique and of his account of nonfoundationalist alternatives, he urges judges and jurists to engage in law’s language game of politics. This engaging book will interest linguistic philosophers, legal theorists, law students, attorneys, judges, and jurists of all stripes. Three Questions Concerning Modern Legal Thought Provide The Framework For It's All In The Game: What Should Judges Do? What Do Judges Do? What Can Judges Do? Contrasting His Own Answers To Traditional Responses And Moving Playfully Between Debates Of High Theory, Daily Practices Of Appellate Judges, And His Own Enlightening Analyses Of Significant Court Rulings. Allan C. Hutchinson Examines What It Means To Treat Adjudication As An Engaged Game Of Rhetorical Justification. His Resulting Argument Enables The Reader To Grasp More Fully The Practical Operation, Political Determinants, And Transformative Possibilities Of Law And Adjudication.--book Jacket. Playing The Game : An Introduction -- It's All In The Game : Adjudication In A Nonfoundationalist Way -- The Language Game : From Ambiguity To Indeterminacy -- A Pure Way Of Playing : The Naturalist Revival -- At Play Inthe Fields Of Law -- The Reasoning Game -- Playing By The Rules : A Good Faith Approach -- Calling The Shots : The Development Of Legal Doctrine -- Playing Politics : Putting Poetry In Motion -- Playing With The Rules : Experiments In Judging -- Overtime? A Conclusion. Allan C. Hutchinson. Includes Bibliographical References (p. [343]-370) And Index. Includes Bibliographical References (pages 343-370) And Index. Contents 8 Preface 10 1 Playing the Game: An Introduction 16 2 It’s All in the Game: Adjudication in a Nonfoundationalist Way 35 3 The Language Game: From Ambiguity to Indeterminacy 69 4 Playing with Authority: Interpretation and Identity 101 5 A Pure Way of Playing: The Naturalist Revival 131 6 At Play in the Fields of Law: The Reasoning Game 166 7 Playing by the Rules: A Good Faith Approach 195 8 Calling the Shots: The Development of Legal Doctrine 231 9 Playing Politics: Putting Poetry in Motion 267 10 Playing with the Rules: Experiments in Judging 303 11 Overtime? A Conclusion 335 Appendix 348 Notes 358 Index 386 The author argues for an understanding of judging that rejects foundationalism (the effort to ground legal thought on something), attempts to carve out a "middle way" between formalist and the political visions of law, and offers a reconceptual What should judges do? What do judges do? What can judges do? This title includes these three questions concerning modern legal thought. It examines what it means to treat adjudication as an engaged game of rhetorical justification.