Chief Justice Dixon on Judicial Integrity: Lessons for Judges when Interpreting Constitutions

dc.contributor.authorThompson, Keith
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-16T17:06:06Z
dc.date.available2024-05-16T17:06:06Z
dc.date.issued2024-05-01
dc.description32 pagesen_US
dc.description.abstract"In this Article, I suggest that Chief Justice Dixon considered that judicial virtue did not allow any judge to follow his own lights when precedent, established custom, or constitutional convention dictated a contrary result. In later Parts of the Article, I relate Chief Justice Dixon’s famous 1952 statement about “strict and complete legalism” to both judicial integrity and freedom of religion at common law. I suggest that Chief Justice Dixon’s primary concern when he became Chief Justice was not to talk about judicial method but rather to signal judicial virtue to all Australian judges, present and future. Not only does Chief Justice Dixon provide lessons for Australian judges but for judges everywhere grappling with these issues, including those in the United States."en_US
dc.identifier.citation25 Or. Rev. Int'l L. 115en_US
dc.identifier.issn1543-9860
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1794/29454
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Oregon School of Lawen_US
dc.rightsAll Rights Reserved.en_US
dc.subjectConstitutional lawen_US
dc.subjectUnited Statesen_US
dc.subjectAustraliaen_US
dc.subjectChief Justice Owen Dixonen_US
dc.subjectJudicial integrityen_US
dc.titleChief Justice Dixon on Judicial Integrity: Lessons for Judges when Interpreting Constitutionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
3. Thompson_ORIL25.pdf
Size:
714.96 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.22 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: