Postponed to March 9th: Jorge Luis Fabra Zamora (McMaster University)
**Location and Time Change UH 122 4:30 pm to 6:00 pm**
“Hartian Jurisprudence Beyond the State: The argumentative conception of validity and officialdom”
Abstract: This paper is a modest contribution to the debate about the possibility of analytical jurisprudence beyond the state. Here, I am mainly concerned with attempting to defend the account of law eveloped by H.L.A. Hart against the critique advanced by Culver & Giudice. They argue that the Hartian model is unable to account for non-state legal phenomena, like international law or the European Union, because it is based in a hierarchical-deductive model for identifying the norms of the system and its officials. As such legal instances lack of hierarchy, Hart lacks of a proper model to identify not only which norms pertain such legal systems, but, more crucially, the officials whose practices constitute those norms. The key move of this paper is a friendly modification to the Hartian model. I develop an alternative conception of validity and officialdom that I will call, for the lack of a better name, the “argumentative conception.” The main idea is that the notion of hierarchy understood as “chains of validity” cannot account even for common legal acts within the state, such as analogy or balancing. Instead, we should take into account the processes providing reasons for taking a course of action based on some norms, or for accepting authoritative pronouncements, as central to any successful account for validity. Similarly, the same processes are fundamental to determining which officials pertain to the system. With such account in place, I attempt to show how the Hartian model provides the best account of non-state legal phenomena in spite their lack of established hierarchies.
To view the full roster of speakers, please visit our Speaker Series page.
Date(s) - March 9, 2016
4:30 pm - 6:00 pm
Powered by Events Manager