This paper engages in a inquiry into the roles that courts play within the legal system, given that judges are interdependent interpreters of legal rules that are boundedly rational and, arguably, politically biased. Contemporary authors claim that, although these two conditions play an important role in interpretation, contemporary theories in jurisprudence have not addressed them properly. Their assessments raise legal issues that are very significant; given the fact that judges are boundedly rational and tend to display political biases, how should they interpret legal rules? Is it best for them to interpret these rules in a formalist fashion, without resorting to resources such as legislative history? Or should they be faithful agents of legislatures, interpreting legal rules according to the changing conditions of society? Given these conditions, how should we assess the institutional performance of courts in the legal system?
- Institutional context,
- separation of powers,
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/andres_palacios_lleras/7/