Spór o poprawną interpretację Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych. Od pasywizmu do aktywizmu sądowego
| dc.contributor.author | Tomza, Anna | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-09-20T07:25:03Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-09-20T07:25:03Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Tomza A., Jurysprudencja 7. Spór o poprawną interpretację Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych. Od pasywizmu do aktywizmu sądowego, Łódź 2016, https://doi.org/10.18778/8088-006-1 | pl_PL |
| dc.identifier.isbn | 978-83-8088-006-1 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11089/43280 | |
| dc.description | Zagadnienie poprawnej interpretacji Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych nie tylko było zawsze przedmiotem sporu amerykańskiej i europejskiej nauki prawa, lecz także angażowało szeroko pojętą opinię publiczną. W książce przedstawiono najbardziej znaczące i powszechnie akceptowane poglądy teoretyków i praktyków amerykańskiej jurysprudencji, których przegląd prowadzi czytelników „od pasywizmu do aktywizmu sądowego”. Uwzględniono szczególnie tekstualizm wywodzący się z koncepcji powszechnego znaczenia (plain meaning), sformułowanej przez Oliviera W. Holmesa oraz oryginalizm, który skupia się – jak podkreśla Antoni G. Scalia – na poszukiwaniu koncepcji znaczenia ,,znaczenia” (meaning of meaning), a w szczególności oryginalnego znaczenia (original meaning). Specjalne miejsce zajmuje trójelementowa teoria interpretacji Konstytucji, zwana oryginalizmem semantycznym, promowana przez Lawrence’a Soluma. Licznych zwolenników ma także intencjonalizm, zbudowany na kanwie tez Stanleya Fisha, w myśl których idealnym rozstrzygnięciem sporu o interpretację jest koncepcja intencyjnego znaczenia (intention meaning). Całość zamykają ustalenia pojęciowe związane z enigmatycznym terminu, jakim jest aktywizm sądowy (judicial activism), stanowiące po części odpowiedź na pytanie o jego właściwą charakterystykę. | pl_PL |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Udostępnienie publikacji Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego finansowane w ramach projektu „Doskonałość naukowa kluczem do doskonałości kształcenia”. Projekt realizowany jest ze środków Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego w ramach Programu Operacyjnego Wiedza Edukacja Rozwój; nr umowy: POWER.03.05.00-00-Z092/17-00. | pl_PL |
| dc.language.iso | pl | pl_PL |
| dc.publisher | Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego | pl_PL |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | Jurysprudencja;7 | |
| dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe | * |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | * |
| dc.subject | Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych | pl_PL |
| dc.subject | aktywizm sądowy | pl_PL |
| dc.subject | tekstualizm | pl_PL |
| dc.subject | formalizm | pl_PL |
| dc.subject | intencjonalizm | pl_PL |
| dc.subject | filozofia prawa | pl_PL |
| dc.title | Spór o poprawną interpretację Konstytucji Stanów Zjednoczonych. Od pasywizmu do aktywizmu sądowego | pl_PL |
| dc.type | Book | pl_PL |
| dc.rights.holder | © Copyright by Authors, Łódź 2016; © Copyright for this edition by Uniwersytet Łódzki, Łódź 2016 | pl_PL |
| dc.page.number | 138 | pl_PL |
| dc.contributor.authorAffiliation | Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Prawa i Administracji, Katedra Teorii i Filozofii Prawa, 90-232 Łódź, ul. Kopcińskiego 8/12 | pl_PL |
| dc.identifier.eisbn | 978-83-8088-007-8 | |
| dc.references | Abraham, Kenneth S. 1979. “Statutory Interpretation and Literary Theory: Some Common Concerns of an Unlikely Pair.” Rutgers Law Review 32: 676–694. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Aitken, Robert, Marilyn Aitken. 2007. Law Makers. Law Breakers. and Uncommon Trials. Chicago: American Bar Association. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Baker, Lynn A. 2005. “Lochner’s Legacy for Modern Federalism: Pierce County v. Guillen As A Case Study.” Boston University Law Review 85: 727–764. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Balkin, Jack M. 2009. “Framework Originalism and the Living Constitution.” Northwestern University Law Review 103: 549–614. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Banaszak, Bogusław. 2009. „Aktywizm orzeczniczy Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i pojęcie aktywizmu orzeczniczego Sądu Najwyższego czy Sądu Konstytucyjnego. jego zalety i wady”. Przegląd Sejmowy 17.4: 75–91. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Banaszak, Bogusław, Michał Bernarczyk. 2012. Aktywizm sędziowski we współczesnym państwie demokratycznym. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barak, Aharon. 2004. Purposive Interpretation in Law. Princeton–Oxford: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 1999. “An Originalism for Nonoriginalists.” Loyola Law Review 45: 611–654. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 2001. “The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause.” University of Chicago Law Review 68: 101–147. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 2002. “Is the Rehnquist Court an Activist Court? The Commerce Clause Cases.” University of Colorado Law Review 73: 1275–1290. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 2004. “The Original Meaning of The Judicial Power.” Boston University School of Law. Working Paper Series. Public Law & Legal Theory 03-18: 1–22. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 2006. “Scalia’s Infidelity. A Critique of Faint-Hearted Originalism.” University of Cincinnati Law Review 75: 7–24. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barnett, Randy E. 2013. Restoring the Lost Constitution. The Presumption of Liberty. Princeton – Oxford: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Beard, Charles A. 1912. Documents on the State-wide Initiative. Referendum and Recall. New York: The Macmillan Company. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bennett, Robert. 2008. “Originalism: Lessons From Things That Go Without Saying.” Northwestern University School of Law Public and Legal Theory Series 08, 39: 1–35. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Berger, Raoul. 1977. Government by Judiciary. The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bibas, Stephanos. 2001. “Two Cheers. Not Three. For Sixth Amendment Originalism.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 34.1: 45–52. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bibas, Stephanos. 2005. “Originalism and Formalism in Criminal Procedure: The Triumph of Justice Scalia, the Unlikely Friend of Criminal Defendants?” Scholarship at Penn Law University of Pennsylvania Law School 7.29: 183–204. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Biernat, Tadeusz, Marek Zirk-Sadowski, eds. 2008. Politics of Law and Legal Policy. Between Modern and Post-Modern Jurisprudence. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bishop, Joel P. 1882. Commentaries on the Written Laws and Their Interpretation. Boston: Little. Brown & Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Black, Hugo L. 1968. A Constitutional Faith. New York: Knopf. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Blackstone, William. 1776. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Oxford: Clarendon Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Blair, George S. 1967. American Legislatures. Structure and Process. Evanston: Harper & Row. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bobbitt, Philip. 1982. Constitutional Fate: Theory of the Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bojańczyk, Antoni. 2006. „Glosa do wyroku TK z dnia 24 lipca 2006 r. (sygn. akt SK 58/03)”. Przegląd Sejmowy 77.6: 150–163. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Boorstin, Daniel. 1996. The Mysterious Science of the Law. An Essay on Blackstone’s Commentaries. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bork, Robert H. 1971. “Neutral Principles and Some First Amendment Problems.” Indiana Law Journal 47: 1–35. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bork, Robert H. 1985. “Styles in Constitutional Theory.” South Texas Law Review 26: 223–236. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bork, Robert H. 1986. “The Constitution. Original Intent, and Economic Rights.” San Diego Law Review 23: 823–832. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bork, Robert H. 1990. The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of The Law. New York: Free Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bowden, Thomas A. 2009. “Justice Holmes and the Empty Constitution. The Objective Standard.” A Journal of Culture and Politics 4.2: 21–46. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bowen, Catherine. 1966. Miracle at Philadelphia. The Story of the Constitutional Convention. May to September 1787. Boston: Little, Brown & Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Boyd, Julian P., ed. 1955. The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. New York: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Breen, John M. 2000. “Statutory Interpretation and The Lesson Llewellyn.” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 33: 263–448. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Brennan, William J., Jr. 1986. “The Constitution of the United States: Contemporary Ratification.” South Texas Law Review 433: 1–16. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Brest, Paul. 1980. “Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding.” Boston University Law Review 60: 204–238. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bryce, James. 1893. The American Commonwealth. New York–London: Macmillan. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G. 1982. A Common Law for the Age of Statutes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G. 2004. “The Congressional Roots of Judicial Activism.” The Journal of Law & Politics 20: 1287–1316. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G. 2005a. “The Originalist and Normative Case Against Judicial Activism: A Reply to Professor Barnett.” Michigan Law Review 103: 1081–1098. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G. 2005b. “The Tradition of The Written Constitution: Text. Precedent and Burke.” Northwestern University Law Review 6: 1–68. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G. 2007b. “Text vs Precedent in Constitutional Law”. In Originalism A Quarter-Century of Debate, ed. Steven G. Calabresi, 199–210. Washington: Regnery Publishing. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Calabresi, Steven G., Saikrishna B. Prakash. 1994. “The President’s Power to Execute the Law.” Yale Law Journal 104: 1–5. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Casto, William R. 2006. Foreign Affairs and the Constitution in the Age of Fighting Sail. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Colby, Thomas B., Peter J. Smith. 2009. “Living Originalism.” Duke Law Journal 59: 239–307. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Cornell, Saul. 2007. “The Original Meaning of Original Understanding: A Neo-blackstonian Critique.” Maryland Law Review 67: 150–165. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Corwin, Edward S. 1914. “Marbury v. Madison and the Doctrine of Judicial Review”. In The Doctrine of Judicial Review. Its Legal and Historical Basis and other Essays. 1–81. Gloucester: P. Smith. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Cross, Frank B. 1997. “Political Science and the New Legal Realism: A Case of Unfortunate Interdisciplinary Ignorance.” Northwestern University Law Review 92: 251–326. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Currie, David P. 1990. The Constitution in the Supreme Court: The Second Century. 1888–1986, Vol. 2. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Czepita, Stanisław. 1996. Reguły konstytutywne a zagadnienia prawoznawstwa. Szczecin: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Dallas, Alexander D., ed. 1905. Reports of Cases Ruled and Adjudged in the Several Courts of the United States and of Pennsylvania Held at the Seat of the Federal Government, Vol. 3. New York: Banks Law Publishing. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Daszyńska, Jolanta A., red. 2009. Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki. Reminiscencje w 220 rocznicę uchwalenia. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Devitt, Michael. 1981. Designation. New York: Columbia University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Drake, Frederick D., Lynn R. Nelson. 1999. State’s Rights and American Federalism: A Documentary History. London: Greenwood Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Durchslag, Melvyn R. 2002. State Sovereign Immunity. A Reference Guide to the United States Constitution. Westport: Praeger. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Duxbury, Neil. 1997. Patterns of American Jurisprudence. Contributors. Oxford: Clarendon Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law’s Empire. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Dworkin, Ronald. 1996. Freedom’s Law. The Moral Reading of The American Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Dworkin, Ronald. 2006. Justice in Robes. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Easterbrook, Frank H. 1984–1985. “The Supreme Court, 1983 Term-Foreword: The Court and the Economic System.” Harvard Law Review 98.4: 4–60. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Easterbrook, Frank H. 1994. “Text. History and Structure in Statutory Interpretation.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 17: 61–70. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Easterbrook, Frank H. 2002. “Do Liberals and Conservatives Differ In Judicial Activism.” Colorado Law Review 73: 1401–1416. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Eisgruber, Christopher L. 2001. Constitutional Self-Government. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Engdahlt, David E. 1992–1993. “John Marshall ‘Jeffersonian’ Concept of Judicial Review.” Duke Law Journal 42: 279–339. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Eskridge, William N., Jr. 1987. “Dynamic Statutory Interpretation.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 135: 1479–1555. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Eskridge, William N., Jr. 1991. “The New Textualism”. University of California Law Review 37: 621–691. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Epstein, Richard A. 1995–1996. “Constitutional Faith and the Commerce Clause.” Notre Dame Law Review 71: 169–193. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Eskridge, William N., Jr., Philip P. Frickey. 1993. “The Making of the Legal Process.” Harvard Law Review 107: 2031–2055. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fallon, Richard H., Jr. 1987. “A Constructivist Coherence Theory of Constitutional Interpretation.” Harvard Law Review 100: 1189–1286. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fallon, Richard H., Jr. 2002. “The ‘Conservative’ Paths of the Rehnquist Court’s Federalism Decisions.” University of Chicago Law Review 69: 429–494. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Filipowicz, Stanisław. 1997. Pochwała rozumu i cnoty. Republikańskie credo Ameryki. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Znak. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Filkeman, Paul. 1996. “Intentionalism. The Founders and Constitutional Interpretation.” Texas Law Review 75: 435–481. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fish, Stanley. 2005. “There Is No Textualism Position.” San Diego Law Review 42: 1–22. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fish, Stanley. 2008. Interpretacja, retoryka, polityka. Kraków: Universitas. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fisher, Louis. 1972. President and Congress, Power and Policy. New York–London: Free Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fitzpatrick, John C., ed. 1939. The Writings of George Washington, Vol. 30. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Frankfurter, Felix. 1947. “Some Reflections on the Reading of Statutes.” 381–385. Columbia Law Review 47. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Freund, Paul A. 1968. On Law and Justice. Cambridge: Balknap Press of Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Freund, Paul A. 1987–1988. “Essays on the Supreme Court Appointment Process: Appointment of Justice: Some Historical Perspectives.” Harvard Law Review 101: 1146–1163. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Friedenthal, Jack H., Joshua E. Gardner. 2004. “Judicial Discretion to Deny Summary Judgment in The Era of Managerial Judging.” Hofstra Law Review 31: 91–132. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Friedman, Lawrence M. 1985. A History of American Law. New York: Simon and Schuster. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Galligan, Denis, Marcin Matczak. 2005. Strategie orzekania sądowego. O wykonywaniu władzy dyskrecjonalnej przez sędziów sądów administracyjnych w sprawach gospodarczych i podatkowych. Warszawa: Sprawne Państwo. Program Ernst & Young. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Garlicki, Lech. 1982. Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki: konstytucja – polityka – prawa obywatelskie. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Gedicks, Frederick M. 2009. “An Originalist Defense of Substantive Due Process: Magna Carta, Higher-Law Constitutionalism, and the Fifth Amendment.” Emory Law Journal 58: 585–674. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Gerhardt, Michael J. 1994. “A Tale of Two Textualists: A Critical Comparison of Justices Black and Scalia.” College of William & Mary Law School. Scholarship Repository. Faculty Scholarship Publications 990: 25–66. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Gilson, Etienne. 1975. Lingwistyka a filozofia. Rozważania o stałych filozoficznych języka. Warszawa: Instytut Wydawniczy PAX. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Gizbert-Studnicki, Tomasz. 1978. Wieloznaczność leksykalna w interpretacji prawniczej. Rozprawy habilitacyjne nr 17. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Goldford, Dennis J. 2005. The American Constitution and the Debate Over Originalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Górski, Grzegorz. 2006. Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednoczonych do roku 1930. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Green, Craig. 2009. “Intellectual History of Judicial Activism.” E mory L aw J ournal 58.5: 1195–1263. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Green, Jamal. 2009a. “On the Origins of Originalism.” Columbia Law Review 3.9: 1–78. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Green, Jamal. 2009b. “Selling Originalism.” The Georgetown Law Journal 97: 658–721. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Greenawalt, Kent. 1997. “The Nature of Rules and the Meaning of Meaning.” Notre Dame Law Review 72: 1449–1477. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Greenberg, Mark D., Harry Litman. 2009. “The Meaning of Original Meaning.” Georgia Law Journal 86: 570–619. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Greene, Abner S. 2006. “The Missing Step of Textualism.” Fordham Law Review 74: 1913–1936. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Grey, Thomas C. 1999. “The New Formalism.” Stanford Law School Working Papers 4: 1–30. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Grice, Paul. 1991. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Gwyn, William B. 1965. The Meaning of The Separation of Powers. An Analysis of the Doctrine From Its Origin to the Adoption of the United States Constitution. New Orleans–The Hague: Tulane University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Haines, Charles G. 1944. The Role of the Supreme Court in American Government and Politics. 1789–1835. Berkeley–Los Angeles: University of California Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hall, Kermit L., William M. Wiecek, Paul Finkelman. 1991. American Legal History. Cases and Material. New York: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hamowy, Ronald. 2008. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hart, Henry, Jr., Albert Sacks. 1994. The Legal Process: Basic Problems In The Making and Application of Law. Westbury: Foundation Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hart, Herbert L. A. 1965. “Book Review The Morality of Law by L. L. Fuller.” Harvard Law Review 78: 1281–1296. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hart, Herbert L. A. 1977. “American Jurisprudence Through English Eyes. The Nightmare and The Noble Dream.” Georgia Law Review 11: 969–990. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hirschl, Ran. 2006. “The New Constitutionalism and the Judicialization of Pure Politics Worldwide.” Fordham Law Review 75: 721–754. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hofstadter, Richard. 1955. The American Political Tradition and the Man Who Made It. New York: Vintage Books. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hohfeld, Wesley N. 1923. Fundamental Conceptions. New Haven: Yale University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Holland, Kenneth M., ed. 1991. Judicial Activism in Comparative Perspective. London: Macmillan. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Holmes, Oliver W. 1899. “The Theory of Legal Interpretation.” Harvard Law Review 12.6: 417–420. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Holmes, Oliver W. 2005. The Common Law. New York: Lawbook Exchange Clark. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hook, Sidney, ed. 1964. Law and Philosophy: A Symposium. New York: New York University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hughes, Diane L. 1995. “Justice Stevens’s Method of Statutory Interpretation: A Well-Tailored Means for Facilitating Environmental Regulation.” Harvard Environmental Law Review 19: 493–552. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Huhn, Willson. 2003. “The Stages of Legal Reasoning: Formalism, Analogy and Realism.” Villanova Law Review 48: 1–79. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Hyneman, Charles S. 1963. The Supreme Court on Trial. New York: Atherton Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Jaff Peter. 2009. “Varieties of Textualism: Unit of Analysis and Idiom in the Interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).” The Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy 7: 305–331. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Jefferies, Kevin. 2001. “Judicial Activism and the Necessity of Auxiliary Precautions.” South Texas Law Review 43: 101–119. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Karkkainen, Bradley C. 1994. “ ‘Plain Meaning’: Justice Scalia’s Jurisprudence of Strict Statutory Construction.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 19: 401–477. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Kirk, Russell. 1986. The Conservative Mind. From Burke to Eliot. Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Kirk, Russell. 2005. Przyszłość konserwatyzmu. Tł. Borys Walczyna. Warszawa: Arwil s.c. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Kłoskowska, Antonina. 1964. Kultura masowa. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Kmiec, Keenan D. 2004. “The Origin and Current Meanings of ‘Judicial Activism’.” Colorado Law Review 92: 1441–1477. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Koch, Adrienne. 1961. Power. Morals. and the Founding Fathers: Essays in the Interpretation of the American Enlightenment. New York: Ithaca. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Kowalski, Jerzy. 1959. Amerykański funkcjonalizm prawniczy. Warszawa: Mieczysław Maneli Publisher. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Laidler, Paweł. 1994. Basic Cases In U.S. Constitutional Law. The Separation of Powers. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Laidler, Paweł. 2007. Konstytucja Stanów Zjednoczonych Ameryki. Przewodnik. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Landis, James L. 1930. “A Note on ‘Statutory Interpretation’.” Harvard Law Review 43: 886–893. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Lang, Wiesław, Jerzy Wróblewski. 1986. Współczesna filozofia i teoria prawa w USA. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Langer, Tomasz. 1988. Stany w USA. Instytucje – praktyka – doktryna. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Lawson, Gary. 1994. “The Constitutional Case Against Precedent.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 17: 23–33. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Leiter, Brian. 1999. “Positivism, Formalism, Realism.” Columbia Law Review 99: 1138–1164. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Leszczyński, Jerzy. 2010. Pozytywizacja prawa w dyskursie dogmatycznym. Kraków: Universitas. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Lipkin, Robert J. 2008. “We Are All Judicial Activist Now.” University of Cincinnati Law Review 77: 182–232. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Llewellyn, Karl N. 1950. “Remarks on the Theory of Appellate Decision and the Rules or Canons.” Vanderbilt Law Review 3: 395–401. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Llewellyn, Karl N. 1960. The Common Law Tradition. Boston: Little, Brown & Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Longchamps de Bérier, Franciszek. 2010. „Antydyskryminacyjna dyskryminacja? Granice polityki rasowej zakreślane przez Sąd Najwyższy Stanów Zjednoczonych”. Forum Prawnicze 1.1: 12–23. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Ludwikowska, Anna M. 1999. System prawa Stanów Zjednoczonych. Toruń: TNOiK. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Ludwikowska, Anna M., Rett Ludwikowski. 2008. Sądy w Stanach Zjednoczonych. Struktura i jurysdykcja. Toruń: TNOiK. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | MacCormick, Neil, Ota Weinberger. 1986. An Institutional Theory of Law. New Approaches to Legal Positivism. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Main, Thomas O. 2006. “Judicial Discretion to Condition.” Temple Law Review 79.4: 1075–1126. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Majchrowski, Jacek M., red. 1991. „Idee – państwo – prawo”. Zeszyty Naukowe UJ. Prace z Nauk Politycznych 28: 179–191. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Małajny, Ryszard M. 2001. Trzy teorie podzielonej władzy. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Małajny, Ryszard M. 2003. „Reguła równości wobec prawa w orzecznictwie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego”. W Sześć lat Konstytucji Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej: doświadczenia i inspiracje. 177–188. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Małajny, Ryszard M., red. 2008. Konstytucjonalizm a doktryny polityczno-prawne. Najnowsze kierunki badań. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Manning, John F. 2001. “Textualism and the Equity of the Statute.” Columbia Law Review 101: 1–127. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Manning, John F. 2003. “The Absurdity Doctrine.” Harvard Law Review 116.3: 2387–2486. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Manning, John F. 2005. “Textualism and Legislative Intent.” Virginia Law Review 91: 419–450. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Manning, John F. 2006a. “What Divides Textualist from Purpositivism.” Columbia Law Review 70: 70–111. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Manning, John F. 2006b. “Justice Scalia and the Legislative Process.” New York University Annual Survey of American Law 62: 33–43. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Marmor, Andrei. 1997. Law and Interpretation. Essays in Legal Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Marmor, Andrei. 2005. “The Immorality of Textualism.” Loyola Law Review 38: 1–19. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Marshall, William P. 2002. “Conservatives and the Seven Sins of Judicial Activism.” University of Colorado Law Review 72: 101–140. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Marzula, Nancie G. 2002. “The Textualism of Clarence Thomas: Anchoring the Supreme Court’s Property Rights Jurisprudence to the Constitution.” Journal of Gender. Social Policy & The Law 10: 351–379. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Mason, Alpheus T., William M. Beaney. 2007. American Constitutional Law. Introductory Essays and Selected Cases. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Matczak, Marcin. 2007. Summa iniuria. O błędzie formalizmu w stosowaniu prawa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McCloskey, Robert G. 2010. The American Supreme Court. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McGinnis, John O., Michael B. Rappaport. 2007a. “A Pragmatic Defense Originalism.” Northwestern University Law Review 101.1: 917–935. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McGinnis, John O., Michael B. Rappaport 2007b. “Original Interpretative Principles as The Core of Originalism.” Northwestern University School of Law. Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series. Constitutional Commentary 962 142: 1–9. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McGinnis, John O., Michael B. Rappaport. 2009. “Original Methods Originalism. A New Theory of Interpretation and The Case Against Construction.” Northwestern University Law Review 103.2: 751–802. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McGowan, David O. 2000. “Ethos in Law and History: Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist, and the Supreme Court.” Minnesota Law Review 85: 755–898. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McGowan, David O. 2008. “Do As I Do, Not As I Say: An Empirical Investigation of Justice Scalia’s Ordinary Meaning Method of Statutory Interpretation.” Legal Studies Research Paper Series 08-015, April: 1–43. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Medina, Barak. 2007. “Four Myths of Judicial Review: A Response to Richard Posner’s Criticism of Aharon Barak’s Judicial Activism.” 1–9. Harvard International Law Journal 49: 1–9. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Meese, Edwin III. 1985. “Speech Before The D.C. Chapter of The Federalist Society Lawyers Division. Washington, D.C. November 15,” [w:] Steven Calabresi, ed. 2007a. Originalism. A Quarter-Century of Debate. 71–83. Washington: Regnery Publishing, Inc. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Meese, Edwin III. 1996. “The Return to Constitutional Interpretation from Judicial Law-Making.”New York Law School Law Review 40: 925–933. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Miller, Frederick T. 1994. Juries and Judges versus the Law. Virginia’s Provincial Legal Perspective, 1783–1828. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Minelli, Christopher R. 2007. “Textualism as a Touchstone for Privately-Focused Treaty Interpretation.” University of Illinois College of Law 20, August: 1–6. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Molot, Jonathan T. 2006. “The Rise and Fall Textualism.” Columbia Law Review 106.1: 1–69. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Monaghan, Henry P. 1988. “Stare Decisis and Constitutional Adjudication.” Columbia Law Review 88.4: 723–773. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Monteskiusz. 1957. O duchu praw. Tł. Tadeusz Boy-Żeleński. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Morawski, Lech. 2002. Wykładnia w orzecznictwie sądów. Toruń: TNOiK. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Morawski, Lech. 2006. Zasady wykładni prawa. Toruń: TNOiK. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Morawski, Lech. 2009. „Zasada trójpodziału władzy. Trybunał Konstytucyjny i aktywizm sędziowski”. Przegląd Sejmowy XVII 4.93: 59–74. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Mullins, Morell E. 2003. “Tools. Not Rules: The Heuristic Nature of Statutory Interpretation.” Journal of Legislation 30: 3–76. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nelson, Caleb. 2003. “Originalism and Interpretive Conventions.” The University of Chicago Law Review 70: 519–598. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nelson, Caleb. 2005a. “A Response to Professor Manning.” Virginia Law Review 91: 451–470. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nelson, Caleb. 2005b. “What is Textualism.” Virginia Law Review 91: 347–418. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nelson, Thomas. 1978. “Raoul Berger. Government by the Judiciary: The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Valparaiso University Law Review 12.3: 617–621. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Newmyer, R. Kent. 2001. John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nowak, John E., Ronald D. Rotunda. 1983. Constitutional Law. St. Paul: West Publishing Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | O’Gorman, Frank. 2004. Edmund Burke: His Political Philosophy. London: Routledge. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | O’Neil, Jonathan. 2007. Originalism in American Law and Politics. A Constitutional History. Baltimore – London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Opałek, Kazimierz, Jerzy Wróblewski. 1963. Współczesna teoria i socjologia prawa w Stanach Zjednoczonych Ameryki Północnej. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Osiatyński, Wiktor. 1984. Współczesny konserwatyzm i liberalizm amerykański. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Osiatyński, Wiktor. 1997. Wizje Stanów Zjednoczonych w pismach Ojców Założycieli. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Ostrom, Vincent. 1994. Federalizm Amerykański. Tworzenie społeczeństwa samorządnego. Tł. Justyna Kubicka-Daab. Warszawa–Olsztyn: Polskie Towarzystwo Psychologiczne. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Parrington, Vernon L. 1970. Główne nurty myśli amerykańskiej 1800–1860. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pattison, Mark. 1889. Essays by the Late Mark Pattison. Ed. Henry Nettleship. Oxford: Clarendon Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Percival, Robert V. 1995. “Environmental Federalism: Historical Roots and Contemporary Models.” Maryland Law Review 54: 1141–1182. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Perry, Barbara A. 2004. “Original Intent or Evolving Constitution? Two Competing View on Interpretation.” Insights on Law & Society 5, Fall: 4–30. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pettys, Todd E. 2009. “The Myth of the Written Constitution.” Notre Dame Law Review 84.3: 101–162. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Philipse, Herman. 2007. “Antonin Scalia’s Textualism in Philosophy, Theology, and Judicial Interpretation of the Constitution.” Utrecht Law Review 3.2, December: 169–192. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pierce, Richard J. 1994. “The Supreme Court’s New Hypertextualism: An Invitation to Cacophony and Incoherence in the Administrative State.” Columbia Law Review 95: 749–781. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Posner, Richard A. 1983. “The Meaning of Judicial Self-Restraint.” Indiana Law Journal 59: 1–24. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Posner, Richard A. 1988. “The Jurisprudence of Skepticism.” Michigan Law Review 86.5, April: 827–891. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Posner, Richard A. 1990. The Problems of Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Post, Robert, Reva Siegel. 2006. “Originalism as Political Practice: The Right’s Living Constitution.” Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship 1: 545–574. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Post, Robert, Reva Siegel. 2007. “Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash.” Harvard Civil Rights – Civil Liberties Law Review 42: 373–433. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Potter, Kathleen O. 2002. The Federalist’s Vision of Popular Sovereignty in The New American Republic. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pound, Roscoe. 1921. The Spirit of Common Law. Boston: Marshall Jones Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pound, Roscoe. 1922. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pound, Roscoe. 1959. Jurisprudence. St. Paul: West Publishing Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Powell, H. Jefferson. 1987. “Rules for Originalists.” Virginia Law Review 73: 659–699. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Prostak, Rafał. 2007. „Polityka i konstytucja. Refleksje nad prawem do prywatności w kontekście orzecznictwa Sądu Najwyższego Stanów Zjednoczonych”. Civitas. Studia z Filozofii Polityki 10: 60–77. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Pułło, Andrzej. 1997. System konstytucyjny Stanów Zjednoczonych. Warszawa. Wydawnictwo Sejmowe. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Quarishi-Landes, Asifa. 2007. “Interpreting the Qur’an and the Constitution: Similarities’ in the Use of Text, Tradition, and Reason in Islamic and American Jurisprudence.” University of Wisconsin Law School. Legal Studies Research Paper Series 1036: 67–121. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Quinn, Frederick, oprac. 1999. Eseje polityczne federalistów. Tł. Barbara Czarska. Kraków: Społeczny Instytut Wydawniczy Znak. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Redford, Emette S., David B. Truman, Andrew Hacker, Alan F. Westin, Robert C. Wood. 1965. Politics and Government in The United States: National, State, and Local Edition. New York–Chicago–Burlingame: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Rehnquist, William H. 2006. “The Notion of Living Constitution.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 29.2: 401–415. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Reich, Charles A. 1963. “Mr. Justice Black and the Living Constitution.” Harvard Law Review 76: 673–754. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Ringhand, Lori A. 2007. “Judicial Activism: An Empirical Examination of Voting Behavior on the Rehnquist Natural Court.” University of Georgia School of Law 24.43: 1–45. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Roberts, Caprice L. 2006. “Ratios, (Ir)rationality & Civil Rights Punitive Awards.” Akron Law Review 39: 1019–1046. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Roberts, Caprice L. 2007. “In Search of Judicial Activism: Dangers in Quantifying the Qualitative.” Tennessee Law Review 567: 1–45. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Rossister, Clinton. 1961. The Federalist Papers. New York: New American Library. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Rostorotski, Artour. 2011. “Book Review – David A. Strauss, ‘The Living Constitution’ (2010).” German Law Journal 12.7: 1546–1552. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Rot, Henryk. 1973. „O prawie jako zjawisku kultury”. Kultura i Społeczeństwo 17.4: 89–106. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Rubin, Edward L., Malcolm Feeley. 1994. “Federalism: Some Notes on a National Neurosis.” Ucla Law Review 41: 903–952. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Sarnecki, Paweł. 2008. Ustroje konstytucyjne państw współczesnych. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer Polska. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Scalia, Antonin G. 1989. “Originalism: The Lesser Evil.” University of Cincinnati Law Review 57: 849–865. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Scalia, Antonin G. 1990. “Assorted Canards of Contemporary Legal Analyses.” Case Western Reserve Law Review 40: 581–597. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Scalia, Antonin G. 1997. A Matter of Interpretation. Federal Courts and The Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Scalia, Antonin, Steven G. Calabresi. 2007. Originalism: A Quarter-Century of Debate. Washington: Regnery Publishing, Inc. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Schauer, Frederick. 1988. “Formalism.” Yale Law Journal 97: 509–548. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. 1947. “The Supreme Court: 1947.” Fortune 35, January: 202–208. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Schwartz, Alan. 2001. “New Textualism and the Rule of Law Subtext in the Supreme Court’s Bankruptcy Jurisprudence.” Faculty Scholarship Series 312: 149–197. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Schwartz, Bernard. 1977. The Great Rights of Mankind. A History of the American Bill of Rights. New York: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Schwartz, Herman. 2000. The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post-Communist Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Searle, John R., ed. 1971. The Philosophy of Language. London: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Searle, John R. 1987. Czynności mowy. Rozważania z filozofii języka. Tł. Bohdan Chwedeńczuk. Warszawa: PAX. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Shane, Peter. 2000. “Federalism’s ‘Old Deal’: What’s Right and Wrong With Conservative Judicial Activism.” Villanova University School of Law. Public Law and Legal Theory 45.2: 201–243. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Shannon, Timothy J. 2000. Indians and Colonists at the Crossroads of Empire. The Albany Congress of 1754. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Siegel, Jonathan R. 1998. “Textualism and Contextualism in Administrative Law.” Boston University Law Review 78: 1023–1112. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Siegel, Neil S. 2010. “Interring the Rhetoric of Judicial Activism.” DePaul Law Review 59: 555–599. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Simon, Rita. 1980. The Jury: Its Role In American Society. Lanham: Lexington Books. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Smith, Page. 1980. The Shaping of America: A People’s History of the Young Republic, Vol. 3. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Smith, Peter J. 2008. “Textualism and Jurisdiction.” Columbia Law Review 108: 1883–1948. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Smith, Stephen F. 2002. “Activism as Restraint: Lesson from Criminal Procedure.” Texas Law Review 80: 1057–1115. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Smith, Tara A. 2007. “Why Originalism Won’t Die – Common Mistakes in Competing Theories of Judicial Interpretation.” Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy 2: 159–215. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Soffer, Reba N. 2009. History, Historians, and Conservatism in Britain and America. From the Great War to Thatcher and Reagan. Oxford: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solan, Lawrence M. 2005. “The New Textualists’ New Text.” Loyola Los Angeles Law Review 38: 2027–2062. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solimine, Michael E. 2003. “Formalism, Pragmatism, and the Conservative Critique of the Eleventh Amendment.” Michigan Law Review 10: 1–58. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solum, Lawrence B. 2007. “Constitutional Texting.” University of San Diego Law Review 44: 123–150. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solum, Lawrence B. 2008. “A Reader’s Guide to Semantic Originalism and a Reply to Professor Griffin.” Illinois Public Law Research Paper 08-12: 1–173. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Staszewski, Glen. 2006. “Avoiding Absurdity.” Indiana Law Journal 81: 1001–1065. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Stelmach, Jerzy, Bartosz Brożek. 2004. Metody prawnicze. Kraków: Zakamycze. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Stevens, John P. 1985. “Judicial Restraint.” San Diego Law Review 22: 437–452. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Stone, Julius. 1950. The Province and Function of Law: Law as Logic, Justice and Social Control. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Story, Joseph. 1833. Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States: with a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States. Before the Adoption of the Constitution, Vol. 2. Boston: Hilliard, Gray and Co. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Strauss, David A. 2005. “Originalism, Precedent, and Candor.” Constitutional Commentary 22.2, June: 299–309. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Strauss, David A. 2008. “Why Conservatives Shouldn’t Be Originalists.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 31: 969–976. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Strauss, David A. 2010. The Living Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Strauss, David A. 2011. “Originalism, Conservatism, and Judicial Restraint.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 34.1: 137–146. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Strauss, Leo, Joseph Cropsey, eds. 1972. History of Political Philosophy. Chicago: Rand McNally. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Streiker, Jordan, Sanford Levinson, Jack M. Balkin. 1995. “Taking Text and Structure Really Seriously: Constitutional Interpretation and the Crisis of Presidential Eligibility.” Texas Law Review 74: 1–26. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Summers, Robert S. 1966. “The New Analytical Jurists.” New York University Law Review 41: 861–896. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Sunstein, Cass R. 1987. “Lochner’s Legacy.” Columbia Law Review 87.5: 873–919. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Sunstein, Cass R. 1989. “Interpreting Statutes in the Regulatory State.” Harvard Law Review 103: 1–85. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Sunstein, Cass R. 1996. Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Sunstein, Cass R. 1999. One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Szajnert, Danuta. 2011. Intencja autora i interpretacja – między inwencją a atencją. Teksty i parateksty. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Szyszkowski, Wacław. 1980. Twórcy Stanów Zjednoczonych. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Teles, Steven M. 2008. The Rise of the Conservatism Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton–Oxford: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | The Federalist Papers. 2004. Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | The Federalist Papers. 2006. New York: Cosimo Classics. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | The Federalist Papers. 2008. Oxford: Oxford World’s Classic. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | The Great Debate Interpreting Our Written Constitution. 1986. Washington: The Federalist Society. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | The Writings of George Washington 1788–1790. 1939. Washington: United States Government Printing Office. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tokarczyk, Roman. 2009. Prawo amerykańskie. Kraków: Wolters Kluwer Polska. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Treanor, William M. 1995. “The Original Understanding of the Takings Clause and the Political Process.” Columbia Law Review 95: 782–887. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Treanor, William M. 2007. “Taking Text Too Seriously: Modern Textualism, Original Meaning, and the Case of Amar’s Bill of Rights.” Michigan Law Review 106: 487–543. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Treanor, William M. 2009. “Against Textualism.” Northwestern University Law Review 103.2: 1–24. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tribe, Laurence H. 1988. American Constitutional Law. Minneola: Foundation Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tribe, Laurence H., Michael C. Dorf. 1991. On Reading The Constitution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Troy, Daniel E. 1998. Retroactive Legislation. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Trzecia Debata Tocqueville’owska. Sąd czy ustawodawca: Legitymizacja sądownictwa konstytucyjnego we współczesnej Europie. 2009. Łódź: Centrum Myśli Polityczno-Prawnej im. Alexisa De Tocqueville’a. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tushnet, Mark. 1999. Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts. Princeton: Princeton University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tushnet, Mark. 2008. I Dissent: Great Opposing Opinions in Landmark Supreme Court Cases. Boston: Beacon Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tucker, John R. 1899. The Constitution of the United States: A Critical Discussion of its Genesis, Development, and Interpretation. Longmont: F.B. Rothman, Littleton. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Tucker, St. George. 1803. Blackstone’s Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to The Constitution and Laws. Philadelphia: William Young Birch, and Abraham Small. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Weinrib, Ernest J. 1995. The Idea of Private Law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wells, Harry K. 1956. Pragmatyzm. Filozofia imperializmu. Tł. Andrzej Konarek. Warszawa: Książka i Wiedza. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Whittington, Keith E. 1999. Constitutional Interpretation. Original Intent, and Interpretation Judicial Review. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Whittington, Keith E. 2004. “The New Originalism.” Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy 2: 599–613. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wilkinson, J. Harvie, III. 1989. “The Role of Reason in the Rule of Law.” University of Chicago Law Review 56: 779–809. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wolfe, Christopher. 1994. The Rise of Modern Judicial Review: From Constitutional Interpretation to Judge-Made Law. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wierzbicka, Anna. 1999. Język – umysł – kultura. Wybór prac. Red. Jerzy Bartmiński. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wierzbicka, Anna. 2006. Semantyka. Jednostki elementarne i uniwersalne. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wright, Georg H. 1963. Norm and Action. New York: Humanities. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wróbel, Andrzej. 2010. „‘As far as possible’ – granice aktywizmu sędziowskiego czy alibi dla pasywizmu sędziowskiego, czyli o niektórych problemach wykładni prawa krajowego zgodnie z dyrektywami.20100-p”. W Dyskrecjonalność w prawie – materiały XVIII Ogólnopolskiego Zjazdu Katedr Teorii i Filozofii Prawa. Miedzeszyn k. Warszawy, 22 – 24 września 2008 r. Red. Wiesław Staśkiewicz, Tomasz Stawecki, Warszawa: LexisNexis Polska. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wróblewski, Jerzy. 1988. Sądowe stosowanie prawa. Warszawa: PWN. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wronkowska, Sławomira, red. 2005. Polska kultura prawna a proces integracji europejskiej. Kraków: Zakamycze. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Young, Ernest A. 2002. “Judicial Activism and Conservative Politics.” University of Colorado Law Review 73: 1139–1216. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Young, Ernest A. 2004. “The Rehnquist Court’s Two Federalisms.” Texas Law Review 83: 1–165. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Young, Ernest A. 2007. “The Constitution Outside the Constitution.” Yale Law Journal 117: 408–473. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Zelizer, Julian E., ed. 2004. The American Congress. The Building of Democracy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Zeppos, Nicholas S. 1990. “Legislative History and the Interpretation of Statutes: Toward a Fact – Finding Model of Statutory Interpretation.” Virginia Law Review 76: 1295–1374. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Zirk-Sadowski, Marek. 1977. „Prawo a kultura”. Acta Universitatis Lodzienis. Nauki Humanistyczno-Społeczne 19: 17–27. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Zirk-Sadowski, Marek. 1997. Filozoficzno-teoretyczne problemy sądowego stosowania prawa. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Zirk-Sadowski, Marek, Bartosz Wojciechowski, Tomasz Bekrycht, red. 2014. „Integracja zewnętrzna i wewnętrzna prawoznawstwa”. Jurysprudencja 3: 11–38. | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Balkin, Jack M. Why No One Truly Believes in a Dead Constitution. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2005/08/alive_and_kicking.html | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barczentewicz, Mikołaj. Martwa ręka czy żyjące drzewo? O wykładni Konstytucji USA. http://www.barczentewicz.com/kategoria/prawo/wykladnia-konstytucji/ | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Barczentewicz, Mikołaj. 2010. Oryginalizm jako wykładnia konstytucji. http://www.barczentewicz.com/oryginalizm-jako-koncepcja-wykladni-konstytucji/ | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bielska-Brodziak, Agnieszka. Materiały legislacyjne w dyskursie interpretacyjnym z perspektywy brytyjskiej. amerykańskiej. francuskiej. szwedzkiej i polskiej. http://www.prawo.univ.gda.pl/teoria/uploads/zjazd/Brodziak.pdf | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Bodwen, Thomas A. Justice Holmes and the Empty Constitution. http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2009-summer/justice-holmes-empty-constitution.asp | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Cohen, Adam. 2006. What Chief Justice Roberts Forgot in His First Term: Judicial Modesty. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/opinion/09sun3.html | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Cross, Frank B., Stefanie A. Lindquist. The Scientific of Judicial Activism. http://ssrn.com/abstract=939768 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Goldberg, Daniel. 2006. I do not Think it Means what you Think it Means: How Kripke and Wittgenstein’s Analysis on Rule Following Undermines Justice Scalia’s Textualism and Originalism. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=896106 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Filipowicz, Stanisław. Cud w epoce rozumu. http://www.omp.org.pl/stareomp/index4844.html?module=subjects&func=viewpage&pageid=296 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Fish, Stanley. Intentional neglect. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/opinion/19fish.html | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Holmes, Oliver W. The Path of the Law. http://www.constitution.org/lrev/owh/path_law.htm | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Imburski, Jarosław. 2005. O tym jak korporacja stała się osobą. http://recyklingidei.pl/imburski_o_tym_jak_korporacja_stala_sie_osoba | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Krawczyk, Tomasz F. Bezcenne chwile. http://www.teologiapolityczna.pl/tomasz-f-krawczyk-bezcenne-chwile | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Madison, James. 1787. Notes of Debates in The Federal Convention of 1787. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/debates/preface.html | pl_PL |
| dc.references | McWhinney, Edward. Judicial Activism and The International Court of Justice. http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ls/McWhinney_outline_CT.pdf | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Nowak, Bartłomiej. 2008. „Alexander Hamilton – ojciec kapitalizmu amerykańskiego”. Wrocławskie Studia Erazmiańskie. Zeszyty Studenckie 1. http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/29200/004.pdf | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Scalia, Antonin G. Mułłowie zachodu: sędziowie jako arbitrzy moralni. http://blog.brpo.salon24.pl/126980 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Smith, Tara. Why Originalism Won’t Died – Common Mistakes Competing Theories of Judicial Interpretation. Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy 230. 2007. Online Edition. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1276513 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solum, Lawrence B. A Reader’s Guide to Semantic Originalism and a Replay to Professor Griffin. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1130665 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Solum, Lawrence B. Legal Theory Lexicon 035: Strict Construction and Judicial Activism. http://lsolum.typepad.com/legal_theory_lexicon/2004/05/legal_theory_le_3.html | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Staniłko, Jan F. Rok Temidy- Sąd Najwyższy Stanów zjednoczonych w 2005 r. http://www.omp.org.pl/stareomp/indexc348.html?module=subjects&func=viewpage&pageid=498 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Wilson, Sean. 2009. The Fallacy of Originalism: What Philosophy of Language and Law Says About “Original Meanings”. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1405451 | pl_PL |
| dc.references | Machaj, Łukasz. Wypowiedzi symboliczne w orzecznictwie Sądu Najwyższego USA. http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/38242/Wypowiedzi_symboliczne.pdf | pl_PL |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.18778/8088-006-1 | |
| dc.discipline | filozofia | pl_PL |
| dc.discipline | historia | pl_PL |
| dc.discipline | nauki prawne | pl_PL |
Pliki tej pozycji
Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach
Poza zaznaczonymi wyjątkami, licencja tej pozycji opisana jest jako Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Międzynarodowe