Spiekermann, Kai and Goodin, Robert E. (2012) Courts of many minds. British journal of political science, 42 (3). pp. 555-571. ISSN 0007-1234
Abstract
In 'A constitution of many minds' Cass Sunstein argues that the three major approaches to constitutional interpretation – Traditionalism, Populism and Cosmopolitanism – all rely on some variation of a ‘many-minds’ argument. Here we assess each of these claims through the lens of the Condorcet Jury Theorem. In regard to the first two approaches we explore the implications of sequential influence among courts (past and foreign, respectively). In regard to the Populist approach, we consider the influence of opinion leaders.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJourna... |
| Additional Information: | © 2012 Cambridge University Press |
| Library of Congress subject classification: | J Political Science > JA Political science (General) K Law > K Law (General) |
| Sets: | Departments > Government |
| Rights: | http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/rights/LSERO.htm |
| URL: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/44438/ |
Actions (login required)
 |
Record administration - authorised staff only |
