Article published In:
Journal of Argumentation in ContextVol. 5:3 (2016) ► pp.249–270
What the legislature did not say
Legislative intentions and counterfactuals in legal argumentation
The paper is about the uses of the argument from legislative counterfactual intention, in the field of legal interpretation and argumentation. After presenting the argument from intention in general, it distinguishes the varities of the argument from counterfactual legislative intention and discusses their justification conditions.
References
Allan, J
2000 “Constitutional Interpretation v. Statutory Interpretation. Understanding the Attractions of ‘Original Intent’.” Legal Theory 61: 109–126. 
Austin, J.L
1979 Philosophical Papers. 3rd ed. Edited by J.O. Urmson and G.J. Warnock. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Barak, A
2005 Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bernatchez, S
2007 “De la représentativité du pouvoir législatif à la recherche de l’intention du législateur: les fondements et les limites de la démocratie représentative.” Les cahiers de droit 481: 449–476.
Boella, G. et al.
2010 “
Lex Minus Dixit Quam Voluit, Lex Magis Dixit Quam Voluit: A Formal Study on Legal Compliance and Interpretation.” In AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems, ed. by P. Casanovas et al., 162–183. Berlin: Springer.
Boudreau, C. et al.
2007 “What Statutes Mean: Interpretive Lessons from Positive Theories of Communication and Legislation.” San Diego Law Review 441: 957–992.
Brandom, R.B
1994 Making It Explicit. Cambridge (Mass.) and London: Harvard University Press.
Bratman, M.E
1987 Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason. Cambridge (Mass.) and London: Harvard University Press.
1999 Faces of Intention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, T
2001 “Legislative Intent and Democratic Decision Making.” In Naffine et al. (20011), pp. 291–319.
Canale, D. and Tuzet
2007 “On Legal Inferentialism. Toward a Pragmatics of Semantic Content in Legal Interpretation?” Ratio Juris 201: 32–44.
Canale, D. and G. Tuzet
2008 “On the Contrary: Inferential Analysis and Ontological Assumptions of the A Contrario Argument.” Informal Logic 281: 31–43.
2009 “The A Simili Argument: An Inferentialist Setting.” Ratio Juris 221: 499–509.
2010 “What Is the Reason for This Rule? An Inferential Account of the Ratio Legis
.” Argumentation 241: 197–210.
2011 “Use and Abuse of Intratextual Argumentation in Law.” Cogency
. Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 31: 33–52.
Ekelöf, P.O
1958 “Teleological Construction of Statutes.” In Scandinavian Studies in Law, Vol. 21, ed. by F. Schmidt, 75–117. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Ekins, R
2012 The Nature of Legislative Intent. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feteris, E.T
2005 “The Rational Reconstruction of Argumentation Referring to Consequences and Purposes in the Application of Legal Rules: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective.” Argumentation 191: 459–470.
2008 “Strategic Maneuvering with the Intention of the Legislator in the Justification of Judicial Decisions.” Argumentation 221: 335–353.
Fuller, L.L
1969 The Morality of Law. Revised ed. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Goldsworthy, J
1997 “Originalism in Constitutional Interpretation”. Federal Law Review 251: 1–50.
2005 “Legislative Intentions, Legislative Supremacy, and Legal Positivism.” San Diego Law Review 421: 493–518.
Greenawalt, K
2000 “Are Mental States Relevant for Statutory and Constitutional Interpretation?” Cornell Law Review 851: 1609–1672.
Honoré, T
1987 “How Is Law Possible?” In Id., Making Law Bind. Essays Legal and Philosophical, 1–31. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Levi, E.H
1948 “An Introduction to Legal Reasoning.” The University of Chicago Law Review 151: 501–574.
Lewis, D.K
1973 Counterfactuals. Reissued in 2001. Oxford: Blackwell.
MacPherson, J.A.E
2010 “Legislative Intentionalism and Proxy Agency.” Law and Philosophy 291: 1–29.
Marmor, A
2001 Positive Law and Objective Values. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
2005 Interpretation and Legal Theory. 2nd ed. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing.
McCormick, D.N. and R.S. Summers
(eds) 1991 Interpreting Statutes. A Comparative Study. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
Moreso, J.J
2005 Lógica, argumentación e interpretación en el derecho. Barcelona: Editorial UOC.
Naffine, N. et al.
(eds) 2001 Intention in Law and Philosophy. Aldershot: Ashgate-Dartmouth.
Pettit, P
2001 Collective Intentions. In Naffine et al. (20011), pp. 241–254.
Pino, G
2008 “Il linguaggio dei diritti.” Ragion pratica 311: 393–409.
Quine, W.V.O
1982 Methods of Logic. 4th ed. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
Radin, M
1930 “Statutory Interpretation.” Harvard Law Review 431: 863–885.
Raz, J
1996 “Intention in Interpretation.” In The Autonomy of Law. Essays on Legal Positivism, ed. by R.P. George, 249–286. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stalnaker, R
2003 Ways a World May Be. Metaphysical a Anti-metaphysical Essays. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Stoljar, N
1998 “Counterfactuals in Interpretation: The Case Against Intentionalism.” Adelaide Law Review 201: 29–59.
2001a “Vagueness, Counterfactual Intentions, and Legal Interpretation.” Legal Theory 71: 447–465.
2001b “Postulated Authors and Hypothetical Intentions.” In Naffine et al. (20011), pp. 271–290.
Summers, R.S
2000 Essays in Legal Theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Williams, J
2001 “Constitutional Intention: The Limits of Originalism.” In Naffine, et al. (20011), pp. 321–341.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Esposito, Fabrizio & Giovanni Tuzet
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.