Selective Affinities: On the American Reception of Hans Kelsen's Legal Theory

D. A. J. Telman
{"title":"Selective Affinities: On the American Reception of Hans Kelsen's Legal Theory","authors":"D. A. J. Telman","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.895561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hans Kelsen (1881-1973), who lived and taught in the United States for over three decades, was one of those emigre intellectuals whose \"style of thinking,\" as H. Stuart Hughes put it, \"withered or barely held [its] own in the new American setting.\" Kelsen's relative obscurity in the U.S. legal academy continues despite a recent revival of interest in German legal theory among U.S. academics. Oddly enough, that revival of interest, which has been spearheaded by self-described post-Marxists and other progressives seeking to develop a new critique of liberalism, has not focused on Kelsen and his social-democratic critics, instead latching onto the writings of Kelsen's Nazi nemesis, Carl Schmitt. Interest in Schmitt has continued to grow, as reflected in the recent writings of America's leading legal economics and law theorist, Richard Posner. Still, one finds surprisingly little American legal scholarship addressing Kelsen's writings. This Article explores the reasons underlying the rejection by the U.S. legal academy of Kelsen's brand of legal positivism and proposes that Kelsen's theories can assist the American legal academy as it continues to struggle to address the problem of indeterminacy in adjudication.","PeriodicalId":337945,"journal":{"name":"Young Scholars Law","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Young Scholars Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.895561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Hans Kelsen (1881-1973), who lived and taught in the United States for over three decades, was one of those emigre intellectuals whose "style of thinking," as H. Stuart Hughes put it, "withered or barely held [its] own in the new American setting." Kelsen's relative obscurity in the U.S. legal academy continues despite a recent revival of interest in German legal theory among U.S. academics. Oddly enough, that revival of interest, which has been spearheaded by self-described post-Marxists and other progressives seeking to develop a new critique of liberalism, has not focused on Kelsen and his social-democratic critics, instead latching onto the writings of Kelsen's Nazi nemesis, Carl Schmitt. Interest in Schmitt has continued to grow, as reflected in the recent writings of America's leading legal economics and law theorist, Richard Posner. Still, one finds surprisingly little American legal scholarship addressing Kelsen's writings. This Article explores the reasons underlying the rejection by the U.S. legal academy of Kelsen's brand of legal positivism and proposes that Kelsen's theories can assist the American legal academy as it continues to struggle to address the problem of indeterminacy in adjudication.
选择性亲和:论美国人对汉斯·凯尔森法律理论的接受
汉斯·凯尔森(Hans Kelsen, 1881-1973)在美国生活和教学了30多年,他是那些“思维方式”——用h·斯图尔特·休斯(H. Stuart Hughes)的话来说——“在新的美国环境中萎缩或勉强维持自己”的流亡知识分子之一。尽管最近美国学术界对德国法律理论的兴趣有所恢复,但凯尔森在美国法律界的相对默默无闻仍在继续。奇怪的是,由自诩为后马克思主义者和其他进步主义者带头的、寻求对自由主义进行新批判的兴趣复兴,并没有把重点放在凯尔森和他的社会民主主义批评者身上,而是锁定在凯尔森的纳粹死对头卡尔·施密特(Carl Schmitt)的著作上。人们对施密特的兴趣持续增长,这反映在美国领先的法律经济学和法律理论家理查德·波斯纳(Richard Posner)最近的著作中。然而,令人惊讶的是,很少有美国法律学者研究凯尔森的著作。本文探讨了美国法学界拒绝凯尔森的实证主义的原因,并提出凯尔森的理论可以帮助美国法学界继续努力解决裁决中的不确定性问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书