Functionalism (law)
| Administrative State |
|---|
| Read more about the administrative state on Ballotpedia. |
In the context of American law, the terms functionalism and legal functionalism can refer to both a method of analyzing the law and explaining legal behavior as well as a method of interpreting constitutions and statutes. Legal functionalism explains and analyzes the law based on the functions that law and legal rules serve for society, the branches of government, interest groups, and other legal actors.[1][2][3]
Background
According to a 2007 article on functionalism written by law and philosophy professor Lawrence B. Solum and published in his online Legal Theory Lexicon, in the context of legal theory, functionalism "attempts to explain and predict legal behavior" by analyzing the functions that law serves:[1]
| “ | Why do legal rules have the form and content that they do, in fact, have? One answer to this question is based on the idea that the function of a rule can be part of a causal explanation of the content of the rule. Why does corporations law limit the liability of stockholders? One kind of answer to that question might begin: 'That rule is the way it is, because it serves the interest of the capitalist class.' Or, 'The rule is that way, because that is the efficient rule, and common law adjudication selects for efficient rules.' In other words, the content of the rule is explained (causally) by the function the rule serves.[4] | ” |
| —Lawrence B. Solum, "Legal Theory Lexicon: Functionalist Explanation in Legal Theory (2007)[1] | ||
In a 1989 journal article on the separation of powers, author Suzanne Prieur Clair argued for the use of a functionalist approach to constitutional interpretation:[2]
| “ | The functionalist approach is based on an interpretation of the Constitution that views the separate powers of the three branches of government as not intended to operate with absolute independence. ... Emphasizing the checks and balances that operate between each branch, a functionalist analysis begins by examining whether the act in question has impermissibly prevented one branch from accomplishing its constitutionally assigned functions. ... When determining whether the core function of a branch has been impermissibly interfered with, the functionalist test emphasizes flexibility and balancing by examining the entire framework of relationships between the branches.[4] | ” |
| —Suzanne Prieur Clair, "Separation of Powers: A New Look at the Functionalist Approach" (1989)[2] | ||
In a 1997 journal article, law and political science professor Erwin Chemerinsky identified four "questions that can provide the basis for a functional analysis" of federalism under the United States Constitution:[3]
| “ |
(1) Is it desirable to limit Congress' power so as to protect state governments? |
” |
| —Erwin Chemerinsky, "Formalism and Functionalism in Federalism Analysis" (1997)[3] | ||
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Legal Theory Lexicon, "Legal Theory Lexicon: Functionalist Explanation in Legal Theory," June 10, 2007
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Case Western Reserve Law Review, "Separation of Powers: A New Look at the Functionalist Approach," 1989
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Georgia State University Law Review, "Formalism and Functionalism in Federalism Analysis," 1997
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
| |||||||||||