Assessing Law's Claim to Authority

Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 31 (3):481-501 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The idea that law claims authority (LCA) has recently been forcefully criticized by a number of authors. These authors present a new and intriguing objection, arguing that law cannot be said to claim authority if such a claim is not justified. That is, these authors argue that the view that law does not have authority viciously conflicts with the view that law claims authority. I will call this the normative critique of LCA. In this article, I assess the normative critique of LCA, focusing predominantly on the arguments presented by its most incisive proponent Philip Soper. I defend a twofold conclusion. First, LCA, understood roughly along the lines put forward by Joseph Raz, is part of the most attractive analysis of law. Second, proponents of the normative critique, and in particular Soper, are committed to accepting LCA.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
VANALC-2
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Definition of Lying.Carson, Thomas L.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Was Ellen Wronged?Garvey, Stephen P.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2011-07-07

Total views
1,477 ( #1,254 of 43,840 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
80 ( #7,209 of 43,840 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.