CHAPTER 4: APPLICATION AND ANALYSIS 3.

LEGAL FORMALISTS’ PERSPECTIVE

- The law is always clear , and, however
1. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF A STATUTE
unjust, must be strictly enforced by
- The court looks at the language used,
officials and obeyed by subjects.
the subject matter, and the intent of the
- In Mapp v. Ohio, the court applied the
lawmakers in enacting the law to find its
legal formalists’ perspective, ruling that
true meaning or what the law is in a
the exclusionary rule must be enforced
case.
to maintain the integrity of
- In the case of Tennessee Valley
constitutional protections.
Authority v. Hill (1978), The SC applied a
- It underscored that those legal
liberal construction of the ESA by
principles, even if they seem unjust in
carefully examining the statute’s
particular cases, must be adhered to
language, legislative history and
strictly.
underlying purpose.
4. HART’S POSITIVIST PERSPECTIVE
- The court ruled that the ESA must be
- The law and morality have nothing to do
followed as written.
with each other so much so that there
- This interpretation highlighted the
can be a bad or immoral law, but it is
importance of adhering to legislative
still a law.
intent and ensuring that environmental
- In Griswold v. Connecticut, the court
conservation objectives are met.
applied Hart’s Positivists perspective,
2. JUDICIAL LEGISLATION
recognizing that while law and morality
- It is the act of a court in engrafting upon
are generally distinct, there are
a law, something that has been omitted
penumbral cases where moral
which the court believes ought to have
considerations influence legal
been embraced.
interpretations.
- Occasions arise when there is a need to
5. NATURALISTS’ POINT OF VIEW
balance competing rights and policies,
- They would simply say that the judge
and courts will have to walk a fine line
should just do what is moral and just
between what is allowable statutory
- In the case of McFall v Shimp, it teaches
construction and illegitimate exercise of
that society or the government cannot
judicial power.
use McFall’s right to life to force Shimp
- In the case of Miranda v. Arizona, the
to subject himself to a bodily intrusion
court engaged in what can be seen as
without his consent, absent any law
judicial legislation by establishing the
ordering Shimp to do so.
requirement for Miranda warnings,
- The effect that the right to life of one
which was not explicitly stated in the
person cannot rend the right to choose
Constitution.
or refuse of another.
- The decision created new procedural
6. PRINCIPLES DEEMED WRITTEN INTO THE LAW
safeguards to ensure that suspects were
- This is an alternative legal theory by
aware of their rights.
Ronald Dworkin that points to principles
- This ruling filled a gap in existing law to
that are woven into the law itself.
protect individuals’ fifth amendment
- In Riggs v. Palmer, in cases like this, the
rights against self-incrimination.
court may interpret the statute in a

PSClaudio_JD1
 manner which displays the lawmakers’ - This critique would emphasize that the
true intentions. law is not neutral but is shaped by
- Theorist Ronald Dworkin rejected the power dynamics and political interests.
positivists’ separation between law and
morality. He said that there are
principles woven into the legal system,
even though they are not expressly
written into the legal provision, and the
judges should not ignore these
principles when deciding cases.

SOCIAL PURPOSE RULE OF STATUTORY

CONSTRUCTION (DWORKIN)

- Which states that a statute should not

be construed in a way that would
violate normal societal values or good.
- The principles that are deemed written
into the law itself are closely related.
7. LEGAL REALISTS’ POSITION
- The judge will arrive at a conclusion
first.
- This conclusion is based on his biases,
morals, prejudices, previous beliefs, and
feelings.
- He will also take into account the
contemporary social interests and
public policy that are pertinent to the
case.
- In Brown v. Board of Education, the
court was influenced by contemporary
social interests and public policy, arrived
at the conclusion that racial segregation
in public schools was inherently unequal
and violated the Equal Protection
Clause.
- The conclusion was based on broader
societal values and then supported by
legal reasoning.
8. If the judge is a proponent of CRITICAL LEGAL
STUDIES.
- He will critique the law in order to open
his eyes to the law’s flaw or defect.

PSClaudio_JD1