Abstract
This analytical paper discusses Ronald Dworkin's concept of Integrity, first introduced in "Law's Empire". This essay discusses its usefulness and necessity within the context of his wider theory of adjudication. A law paper, this essay is divided into various sections to use articles, cases and theory to explain the notion of Dworkin's concept of Integrity.

Outline:
Introduction
Dworkin's theory of Adjudication in brief
"Integrity" and its origins
Adjudicative integrity as applied to Dworkin's theory
Integrity and constructive interpretation
Integrity and the "one right answer" theory
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Dworkin constructs much of his theory as a critique of Hart's Concept of Law - "the most influential model of contemporary positivism, which saw law as consisting of rules with gaps in those rules being filled by judicial discretion."1 He notes that those gaps occur more often than Hart would lead us to believe, and therefore largely concentrates his theory of adjudication, as set out in Law's Empire, on what he calls "the question of repair" - what judges should do in the absence of law.2 It is this aspect of Dworkin's work which will be the focus of the present analysis since it is the most relevant to his concept of "integrity".
"Dworkin completely rejects what he calls the "plain-fact" view of law - that the law is as it has been decided by legal institutions in the past, and "in no way depends on what it should be."3 [emphasis added] Instead he argues a theory of constructive interpretation, whereby a judge who is faced with a gap in the law does not simply use his own discretion, but interprets what the law should be within certain constraints."

Tags:Law, Jurisprudence, Dworkin, Integrity

Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses active radical feminist Andrea Dworkin. The writer points out that examining her writings as well as the larger context within which Dworkin composed them, reveals much about her attack on pornography, her strange alliance with the political Right, and her views on censorship. The writer further discusses that though passionate, Dworkin possessed beliefs and attitudes that should rightly make any civil libertarian cringe.

From the Paper
"Andrea Dworkin died in 2005. She was an active radical feminist up until the time of her death, though her fervor did dwindle toward the end of her life. Dworkin is best known for her crusade against pornography begun in the 1980s and her body of writing that argue that any sexualization of women is a gender power play that relegates women to a secondary status in society."

Tags:porn, andrea, dworkin

Abstract
The paper looks at the competing lens - one literal and acontextual, the other non-literal and contextual - through which jurists look at the laws created by legislators. Using Dworkin's definition of each, time is devoted to looking at how the Taney court used a conflation of both the literal and non-literal conceptual lens to justify an interpretation of the Constitution that denied African-Americans of much-needed protections. The paper also examines another case, "Brown v. Board of Education", in which a non-literal and contextual approach was undertaken by critics of the Supreme Court ruling. The paper demonstrates how Dworkin shows us that jurists and lawyers often have profoundly different conceptions of what the law is - and should be - and this, in the end, colours their approach to finding out what the legislators of any piece of legislation were trying to say.

From the Paper
"The following paper will look at Dworkin's theory of the intentions of legislators and how it should be applied to Roger B. Taney's decision in "Dred Scott v. Sandford". Specifically, the paper looks at the competing lens - one literal and acontextual, the other non-literal and contextual - through which jurists look at the laws created by legislators. Using Dworkin's definition of each, time will be devoted to looking at how the Taney court used a conflation of both literal and non-literal conceptual lens to justify an interpretation of the Constitution that denied..."

Tags:dworkin, taney, scott

Abstract
This paper presents and in-depth analysis of the differing views of two legal theorists, H. L. A. Hart and Gerald Dworkin. Although their views have often been referred to as a debate, the paper highlights their differing ideas on which legal issues are most pressing and relevant. Their outlooks are examined from a philosophical perspective and references are made to how each addressed the other's viewpoint in their writings. The paper also defines various concepts in legal theory, such as legal positivism.

From the Paper
"The "debate" between Dworkin and Hart, may be best understood as not having been a debate at all, as the term is normally used. The differences between the two theorists are not so much contrary views on particular issues, but both more and less than that: differing ideas about which questions and which concerns in legal theory are most pressing (Tushnet, 1983). This is not to say that there are not some overlapping issues about which one could accurately state that the theorists have contrary positions, only that to focus on these direct disagreements would tend to underestimate the extent to which the theorists are actually talking past one another."

Tags:debate, Dworkin, Hart, legal positivism, legal theory, descriptive theory of law

Abstract
This paper discusses Dworkin's argument that secondary rules cannot be social rules, because they are not applied uniformly. He believes that they must be normative rules which have an underlying morality as their basis. It also looks at hoe Coleman argues that they are social rules and that the conventions of the U.S. legal system give judges the right to fine-tune laws to meet the convergent beliefs of society.

From the Paper
"In the U S Ronald Dworkin and Jules Coleman over the course of thirty years engaged in a debate about the source of the power of secondary rules. Dworkin argues that these cannot be social rules which exist because....."

Tags:philosophy, of, law, normative, positive, positivism, hart, social, rule, theory, dworkin, coleman, secondary, law, judges, interpretation, inconsistency, moral, foundation, law, as, convention

Abstract
According to Andrea Dworkin, self-denigrating social behavior is learned behavior and used by women to survive in a sexist world. In Ma Rainey's Black Bottom, there is no evidence of this type of behavior. In fact, Ma Rainey habitually anticipates outcomes based on her assessment of current situations and her knowledge of race relations. Because of her assertive and secure personality, she is not only prepared but compelled to confront sexism and racism. In addition, learned behavior for this woman does not refer to the early socialization process but to life experience which allows her to take a proactive approach to situations. Ma Rainey is always aware of the possibility of exploitation and knows that she is in a potentially inferior position because of her race and gender.

From the Paper
7. Andrea Dworkin's Thesis about self-denigrating social behavior being learned behavior and Ma Rainey in Ma Rainey's Black Bottom and Carol in Oleanna According to Andrea Dworkin, self-denigrating social behavior is learned behavior and used by women to survive in a sexist world. In Ma Rainey's Black Bottom, there is no evidence of this type of behavior. In fact, Ma Rainey habitually anticipates outcomes based on her assessment of current situations and her knowledge of race relations. Because of her assertive and secure personality, she is not only prepared but compelled to confront sexism and racism. In addition, learned behavior for this woman does not

Tags:ma rainey, oleanna, power

Abstract
This paper examines how HLA Hart, a legal positivist, developed his theory on the notion that for a legal system to exist it should comprise entirely of rules and how within this legal system, Hart states that rules are divided into either primary or secondary rules. It looks at how Ronald Dworkin's theory, on the other hand, is founded on criticisms of Hart?s theory. It seeks to analyze Hart's Postscript to "The Concept of Law" and determine to what extent has Hart successfully defended his theory against his critics.

From the Paper
"The basis of Dworkin's theory is founded on criticisms of Hart's theory. Dworkin pictures law as a "gapless" legal universe in which there is always a right answer. He suggests that there is much more to the law than just rules, contending that the Positivist view of a system of rules ignores the important roles of other standards which are not identified as "rules." Dworkin maintains that principles and policies play a crucial role in judicial reasoning, particularly when the existing rules of law prove controversial in a case, as evidence in Riggs v Palmer (1889). This case example provides an intuitive sense of Dworkin's idea of principles."

Tags:positivism, principles, rules

Abstract
This essay critically examines Ronald Dworkin's criticisms of Hart's positivism, in "Models of Rules 1", in order to determine the relative strength of Dworkin's critiques. The paper argues, with reference to the work of both men, on the issue of legal principles, Dworkin's criticism of Hart's positivism is strongest while, in contrast, Dworkin's criticism of the theory of discretion under Hart's positivism is notably weak.

From the Paper
"Critiques of Positivism: Dworkin v. Hart Ronald Dworkin, in "Models of Rules 1," presents a range of criticisms of the philosophy of legal positivism as embodied in the work of H.L.A. Hart."

Tags:law, philosophy, positivism

Abstract
This essay expresses the opposing views of Catherine MacKinnon and Ronal Dworkin regarding the issue of legal regulation of pornography. It states both of the views with quotes from their analysis of cases of American Booksellers v Hudnut, as well as R v Butler. The essay ends with a personal view on the subject matter, with regard to both of the authors' views and finds that although neither presents the full picture, Dworkin's argument focuses more on the legality of the issue as opposed to feminism of MacKinnon.

From the Paper
"Free speech and what it really means has taken different forms for different individuals. And while historically, it has served as a safeguard against hateful and harmful ideas entering a wider social realm, it also leaves enough room for misuse. Is speech to be, to an extent, regulated (as it is in the British Race Relations Act) or is to be equally allowed to any opposing view, no matter how potentially dangerous or degrading it is? Does pornography qualify as a speech and if so, how is it best regulated without stifling the First Amendment? In her 1993 book "Only Words", Catharine MacKinnon gives several arguments regarding pornography."

Tags:pornography, equalitylaw, liberty

Abstract
This seven-page undergraduate paper examines Daniel Lazare's criticism of the Constitution and compares his views to those of Ronald Dworkin. The author agrees with Dworkin and explains why she believes the Constitution provides for a more just society.