Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2018
Abstract
Rights are more than mere interests, but they are not absolute. And so two competing frames have emerged for adjudicating conflicts over rights. Under the first frame, rights are absolute but for the exceptional circumstances in which they may be limited. Constitutional adjudication within this frame is primarily an interpretive exercise fixed on identifying the substance and reach of any constitutional rights at issue. Under the second frame, rights are limited but for the exceptional circumstances in which they are absolute. Adjudication within this frame is primarily an empirical exercise fixed on testing the government’s justification for its action. In one frame, the paradigm cases of rights infringement arise as the consequences of governing poorly. In the other, the paradigm cases arise as the costs of governing well.
Disciplines
Civil Rights and Discrimination | Constitutional Law | Human Rights Law | Law
Recommended Citation
Jamal Greene,
Rights as Trumps?,
132
Harv. L. Rev.
28
(2018).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2920
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons