Semantics and legal interpretation: an approach from a comparative study of the value of embryonic life under the Argentine and U.S. constitutional case law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v1i2.40510Abstract
The paper analyzes the issue of legal interpretation of the Constitution in the light of a comparative approach between the case law of Argentina and the United States about the value attributed to embryonic life.
References
ALEXY, Robert. A Theory of Legal Argumentation: The Theory of Rational Discourse as Theory of Legal Justification. Transalated by Ruth Adler and Neil MacCormick. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
BALKIN, Jack M. How Genetic Technologies will Transform Roe vs. Wade, Emory Law Journal, Atlanta, v. 56, p. 843-864, 2007.
BIX, Brian H. Can Theories of Reference and Meaning Solve the Problem of Legal Determinacy? Ratio Juris, Oxford, v. 16, p.281-295, 2003.
BRADLEY, Gerard V. Life´s Dominion: a Review Essay. (book review), Notre Dame Law Review, Notre Dame, v. 69, p. 329-, 1993.
BREEN, John M; SCAPERLANDA. Never Get Out the Boat. Stenberg vs. Carhart and the Future of American Law. Connecticut Law Review, Hartford, v. 39, n.1, p. 297-323. 2006.
BRINK, David O. Legal Interpretation, Objectivity and Morality. In: LEITER, Brian. Objectivity in Law and Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ed.1, 2001.
CAPRON, Alexander Morgan. Philosophy and Theory: Life’s Sacred Value - Common Ground or Battleground? Michigan Law Review, Ann Arbor, v. 92, p. 1491-,1994.
COLESON, Richard. Judicial Standard of Review and Webster, American Journal of Law & Medicine, Boston, v. 15, p. 211-. 1989.
DWORKIN, Ronald. A Matter of Principle. Cambridge: Havard University Press, 1985.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Freedom’s Law: The Moral Reading of the American Constitution. Cambridge: Havard University Press, 1996.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Law’s Empire. Cambridge: Havard University Press, 1986.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Justice in Robes. Cambridge: Havard University Press, 2006
DWORKIN, Ronald. Objectivity and Truth: You’d Better Believe It. Philosophy and Public Affairs, Princeton, v. 25, p. 87-139, 2006.p.118.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge: Havard University Press, 197
DWORKIN, Ronald. Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should Be Overruled, University of Chicago Law Review, Chicago, v. 59, p. 381-, 1992.
FINNIS, John. Natural Law and Natural Rights. 2 ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2011.
FINNIS, John; DEVER, Carolyn (editors). The international library of essays in law & legal theory series. v.1, Dartmouth: Dartmouth Press, 1991.
GREEN, Abner S. Uncommon Ground, George Washington Law Review, Washington, D.C. v.62 p.646-650, 1994.
KALINOWSKI, George. Introducción a la Lógica Jurídica. Traducida por Juan A. Casaubon. Buenos Aires: Eudeba, 1973.
KAMM, Frances M. Abortion and the Value of Life: A Discussion of Life’s Dominion, (book review).Columbia Law Review, New York, v. 95, p. 160-122, 1995.
KRIPKE, Saul. Naming and Necessity. Oxford: Blackwell, 1980.
LUGOSI, Charles. Conforming to the Rule of Law: When Person and Human Being Finally Mean the Same Thing in the Fourteenth Amendment Jurisprudence. Issues in Law & Medicine, Chicago, v. 22, p. 119-303, 2006/2007.
MOORE Michael S. Justifying the Natural Law Theory of Constitutional Interpretation, Fordham Law Review, New York, v. 59 p. 2087-2117, 2001.
PUTNAM, Hillary. Meaning and reference. Journal of Philosophy, Hanover, v.70, p. 699-711, 1973.
RAKOWSKI, Eric. The Sanctity of Human Life, (book review) Yale Law Journal, New Haven, v. 103, p. 2049-, 1994.
RONHEIMMER, Martin. Fundamental Rights, Moral Law, and the Legal Defense of Life in a Constitutional Democracy: A Constitutionalist Approach to the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, The American Journal of Jurisprudence, v. 43, p.135-183, 1998.
STACY, Tom. Reconciling Reason and Religion: On Dworkin and Religious Freedom. George Washington Law Review, Washington, D.C., v. 63, n.1, p.1-75, 1994.
STAVROPOULOS, Nicos. Objectivity in Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
STENGER, Robert. Embryos, Fetuses and Babies: Treated as Persons and Treated with Respect. Journal of Health & Biomedical Law, Boston, v.2, n.1, p. 33-67, 2006.
STITH, Richard. On Death and Dworkin: A Critique of his Theory of Inviolability. Maryland Law Review, College Park, v. 56, n. 2, p. 289-383, 1997.
WRÓBLEWSKI, Jerzy. Sentido y hecho en el derecho. Tradución: Francisco Javier Ezquiaga Ganuzas e Juan Igartua Salaverría. v.9, series Doctrina Jurídica Contemporánea. México: Fontamara, 2001.
VALLAURI, Luigi Lombardi. Corso di filosofía del Diritto, Padova: CEDAM, 1995.
VINCINGUERRA, Joshua S. Showing “Special Respect” – Permitting the Gestation of Abandoned Preembryos. Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology, Albany, v.9, p. 399-422, 1999.
WALEN, Alec. The Constitutionality of States Extending Personhood to the Unborn, Constitutional Comentary, Buffalo, v. 22 p.161, 2005.
YANG, Diane K. What’s Mine is Mine but What’s Yours Should Also Be Mine: An Analysis of State Statutes that Mandate the Implantation of Frozen Preembryos. Journal of Law and Policy, v. 10, p. 587-592, 2002.
ZAMBRANO, Pilar. Los derechos ius-fundamentales como alternativa a la violencia. Entre una teoría lingüística objetiva y una teoría objetiva de la justicia. Persona y Derecho, Navarra, n. 60, p. 131-152, 2009.
ZAMBRANO, Pilar. La inevitable creatividad en la interpretación jurídica una aproximación iusfilosófica a la tesis de la discrecionalidad. México: Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas, 2009.
ZAMBRANO, Pilar. Objetividad en la interpretacion judicial y objetividad en el Derecho. Una reflexion a partir de las luces y sombras en la propuesta de Ronald Dworkin. Persona y Derecho, n. 56, p. 281-326, 2007.
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish in this Journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Constitutional Research the right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International which allows sharing the work with recognition of the authors and its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are able to take on additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the paper published in this Journal (eg.: publishing in institutional repository or as a book), with a recognition of its initial publication in this Journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish their work online (eg.: in institutional repositories or on their personal website) at any point before or during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as increase the impact and the citation of the published work (see the Effect of Open Access).
