Harder Cases

Ronald C. Den Otter

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511809507.010

9 - Harder Cases

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 December 2010

Ronald C. Den Otter

Show author details

Ronald C. Den Otter: Affiliation:
California Polytechnic State University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

In the previous chapter, I explained why Yoder and same-sex marriage are relatively easy because those on the wrong side use nonpublic reasons to underwrite their respective positions. What is missing from their accounts is an explanation of why an ideal reasonable dissenter would not reject their reasons. In enacting public laws, everyone has a very good reason not to act for certain reasons, namely those based on their deepest convictions, provided that others do likewise, and the Court must ensure that lawmakers do not rely on those kinds of reasons. In the case of religious freedom, the state may not rely on judgments about religious practices and ways of life on the merits, and there should be a strong presumption in favor of free exercise of religion and in favor of personal freedom more generally. In the case of same-sex marriage, moral disapproval of same-sex intimacy or reasons closely related to this view should not serve as the basis of denying marriage licenses to gays and lesbians. The cases of Yoder and same-sex marriage would have been more difficult if both sides had offered sufficiently public reasons of more or less equal strength.

In this chapter, I explain how a judge, who is committed to public justification, should go about deciding harder cases, namely those involving affirmative action and abortion, and then I use the difficulty of those cases to illustrate the limits of public justification.

Type: Chapter
Information: Judicial Review in an Age of Moral Pluralism , pp. 262 - 290

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809507.010 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Elgin, Catharine Z., Considered Judgment (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), ixGoogle Scholar

Sunstein, Cass R., One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 125Google Scholar

Cahn, Steven M., “Introduction,” in The Affirmative Action Debate, 2nd ed., ed. Cahn, Steven M. (New York: Routledge, 2002), xiGoogle Scholar

Anderson, Terry H., The Pursuit of Fairness: A History of Affirmative Action (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 271Google Scholar

Laird, Bob, The Case for Affirmative Action in University Admission (Berkeley, CA: Bay Tree Publishing, 2005), 161–6Google Scholar

Bok, Derek, Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006), 74Google Scholar

Sander, Richard, “The Tributaries to the River,” 25 Law and Social Inquiry (2000), 557–63CrossRef Google Scholar

Thernstrom, Stephan and Thernstrom, Abigail, “Does Your ‘Merit’ Depend on Your Race: A Rejoinder to Bowen and Bok,” in The Affirmative Action Debate, 2nd ed., ed. Cahn, Steven M. (New York: Routledge, 2002), 187Google Scholar

Sher, George, “Diversity,” in The Affirmative Action Debate, 2nd ed., ed. Cahn, Steven M. (New York: Routledge, 2002), 192Google Scholar

Cahn, Steven M., “Introduction,” in The Affirmative Action Debate, 2nd ed., ed. Cahn, Steven M. (New York: Routledge, 2002), xiiiGoogle Scholar

Bowen, William G. and Bok, Derek, “The Meaning of ‘Merit’,” in The Affirmative Action Debate, 2nd ed., ed. Cahn, Steven M. (New York: Routledge, 2002), 177Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, A Matter of Principle (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, Belknap Press, 1985), 299Google Scholar

Katznelson, Ira, When Affirmative-Action Was White: An Untold History of Racial Inequality in Twentieth Century America (New York: W. W. Norton, 2005)Google Scholar

Balkin, Jack M., “Preface,” in What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision, ed. Balkin, Jack M. (New York: New York University Press, 2005), xGoogle Scholar

Reagan, Leslie J., When Abortion Was a Crime: Women, Medicine, and Law in the United States 1867–1973 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 8Google Scholar

Solinger, Rickie, “Introduction: Abortion Politics and History,” in Abortion Wars: A Half Century of Struggle 1950–2000, ed. Solinger, Rickie (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 4Google Scholar

Tribe, Laurence H., Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes (New York: W. W. Norton, 1990), 105Google Scholar

Craig, Barbara Hinkson and O'Brien, David M., Abortion and American Politics (Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers, 1993), 46Google Scholar

Luker, Kristin, Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 193–4Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, Life's Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom (New York: Vintage Books, 1994), 31Google Scholar

McConnell, Michael W., “Roe v. Wade at Twenty-Five: Still Illegitimate,” in The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice, 3rd ed., ed. Baird, Robert M. and Rosenbaum, Stuart E. (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001), 135–8Google Scholar

Bork, Robert H., The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990), 112Google Scholar

Paulsen, Michael Stokes, “Dissenting,” in What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said: The Nation's Top Legal Experts Rewrite America's Most Controversial Decision, ed. Balkin, Jack M. (New York: New York University Press, 2005), 196Google Scholar

Ely, John Hart, “The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade,” 82 Yale Law Journal (1973), 924CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Beckwith, Francis J., Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 106CrossRef Google Scholar

Noonan, John, “An Almost Absolute Value in History,” in The Morality of Abortion: Legal and Historical Perspectives (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970), 51–9CrossRef Google Scholar

Crossed, Carol, “Foreword,” in Murti, Vasu, The Liberal Case against Abortion (R.A.G.E. Media, 2006), 4Google Scholar

Callahan, Sidney, “Abortion and the Sexual Agenda,” in The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice, 3rd ed., ed. Baird, Robert M. and Rosenbaum, Stuart E. (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001), 172Google Scholar

Rawls, John, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 243n32Google Scholar

Koppelman, Andrew, “Forced Labor: A Thirteenth Amendment Defense of Abortion,” 84 Northwestern University Law Review (1990), 480Google Scholar PubMed

Callahan, Joan C., “The Fetus and Fundamental Rights,” in The Ethics of Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice, 3rd ed., ed. Baird, Robert M. and Rosenbaum, Stuart E. (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001), 307Google Scholar

Tooley, Michael, “Abortion and Infanticide,” 1 Philosophy and Public Affairs (1972), 37–65Google Scholar

Greenawalt, Kent, Religious Convictions and Political Choice (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 121Google Scholar

Macedo, Stephen, “In Defense of Liberal Public Reason: Are Slavery and Abortion Hard Cases?” in Natural Law and Public Reason, ed. George, Robert P. and Wolfe, Christopher (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2000), 29Google Scholar

Perry, Michael J.. Morality, Politics, and Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 174–8Google Scholar

Marquis, Don, “Why Abortion Is Immoral,” 86 Journal of Philosophy (1989), 202CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Quinn, Warren, “Abortion: Identity and Loss,” in Morality and Action (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 36CrossRef Google Scholar

Doan, Alesha E., Opposition and Intimidation: The Abortion Wars and Strategies of Political Harassment (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2007), ixCrossRef Google Scholar

Thomson, Judith, “Abortion: Whose Right?” 20 Boston Review (1995), 11–15Google Scholar

Thomson, Judith Jarvis, “A Defense of Abortion,” 1 Philosophy and Public Affairs (1971), 47–66Google Scholar

George, Robert P., “Public Reason and Political Conflict: Abortion and Homosexuality,” 106 Yale Law Journal (1997), 2495CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Singer, Peter and Kuhse, Helen, “On Letting Handicapped Infants Die,” in The Right Thing to Do: Basic Readings in Moral Philosophy, ed. Rachels, James (New York: Random House, 1989), 146Google Scholar

Jaggar, Alison M., “Regendering the U.S. Abortion Debate,” in Abortion Wars: A Half Century of Struggle 1950–2000, ed. Solinger, Rickie (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 342–3Google Scholar

Tribe, Laurence H., God Save This Honorable Court: How the Choice of Supreme Court Justices Shapes Our History (New York: New American Library, 1985), 118Google Scholar

Roosevelt, Kermit, The Myth of Judicial Activism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007), 114Google Scholar

Book contents

9 - Harder Cases

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive