Hart–Dworkin debate

The Hart–Dworkin debate is a debate in legal philosophy between H. L. A. Hart and Ronald Dworkin. At the heart of the debate lies a Dworkinian critique of Hartian legal positivism, specifically, the theory presented in Hart's book The Concept of Law.^[1] While Hart insists that judges are within bounds to legislate on the basis of rules of law, Dworkin strives to show that in these cases, judges work from a set of "principles" which they use to formulate judgments, and that these principles either form the basis, or can be extrapolated from the present rules.^[2]

References

1. Hart, H. L. A. (1994). The Concept of Law (2nd ed.). London: Oxford University Press.; superseded by 3rd edition 2012, edited by Leslie Green.
2. Dworkin, Ronald. "The Model of Rules I," in Taking Rights Seriously (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977).

See also

• Hart–Fuller debate
• Hart–Devlin debate
• Legal positivism

Further reading

• The "Hart-Dworkin" Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed
• Beyond the Hart/Dworkin Debate: The Methodology Problem in Jurisprudence
• Keith Culver (Autumn 2001). "Leaving the Hart–Dworkin debate". The University of Toronto Law Journal. 51 (4): 367–398. doi:10.2307/825911. JSTOR 825911.