Abstract
Fuller, Oakeshott, Hayek, Dworkin and Finnis all sought to define the essential nature of the modern rule of law. In contrast to jurists belonging to the school of legal positivism, they did not restrict themselves to the descriptive analysis of the distinguishing marks and attributes of the modern legal system. Instead, they looked back to the procedures of analysis developed within the tradition of natural law. They did so in the respect that they tried to explain the character of law in terms of its relation to fully normative principles of political morality. What united the theorists in this enterprise was their concern to formulate abstract principles of justice and general political morality that affirmed the overridingness of the rights which individuals held against society and the state.KeywordsForeign PolicyUnited States ConstitutionCivil DisobedienceCommon MoralityLegal PhilosophyThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
