Magna Carta: The rule of law in early common law litigation

Thomas Lund

International Review of Law and Economics, 2016, vol. 47, issue S, 47-52

Abstract: Activist judges are often accused of changing the rule of law into the rule of men. Some Americans are disturbed by U. S. Supreme Court decisions that create new law, invade state sovereignty, and impose recent standards for sexual conduct. The fourteenth century Court of Common Pleas invented the heretical doctrine that judges have the power to change law. The medieval court implemented new rules, ignored the plain meaning of legislation, and undermined Magna Carta guarantees. This paper explains how a head-strong judge seized power, and violated traditional respect for the rule of law. His innovations are discussed in the context of American judicial activism.

Keywords: Activist judges; Common law; Magna Carta; Medieval year books (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818816300217
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:47:y:2016:i:s:p:47-52

DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2016.05.005

Access Statistics for this article

International Review of Law and Economics is currently edited by C. Ott, A. W. Katz and H-B. Schäfer

More articles in International Review of Law and Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().