Anticanon

In American common law, an anticanon is a legal text that is now viewed as wrongly reasoned or decided. The term is also applied in other legal systems.[1][2]

In the United States

The anticanon in U.S. law is a small set of U.S. Supreme Court judgements that have subsequently become widely considered to have been grievously mistaken.[3][4][5][6][7][8]

These cases in the anticanon are:[3]

See also

References
  1. Luxembourg, Université du. "Lunchtime seminar: Instant Anticanon: The UN mass tort litigation memos". University of Luxembourg.
  2. Greene, Jamal (December 2011). "The Anti-Canon". Harvard Law Review. 125 (2): 404. This discussion raises the question of whether other constitutional systems have their own "anticanons." That question exceeds this Article's scope, but two possible examples come to mind.
  3. Greene, Jamal (December 20, 2011). "The Anticanon". Harvard Law Review. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
  4. Lam, Charles (February 17, 2019). "What we can learn from Fred Korematsu, 75 years after the Supreme Court ruled against him". NBC News. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
  5. Amar, Akhil (1 January 2011). "Plessy v. Ferguson and the Anti-Canon". Faculty Scholarship Series. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
  6. Mark A. Graber. "HOLLOW HOPES AND EXAGGERATED FEARS : THE CANON/ANTICANON IN CONTEXT". Digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
  7. Sanford Levinson. "IS DRED SCOTT REALLY THE WORST OPINION OF ALL TIME? WHY PRIGG IS WORSE THAN DRED SCOTT (BUT IS LIKELY TO STAY OUT OF THE "ANTICANON")" (PDF). Cdn.harvardlawreview.org. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
  8. Akhil Reed Amar (2011). "Plessy v. Ferguson and the Anti-Canon". Digitalcommons.law.yale.edu. Retrieved 18 February 2019.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.