Chevron and Auer Deference from the Standpoint of Republican Theory

AbstractPhilip Pettit has made central to modern republican theory a distinctive account of freedom—republican freedom. On this account, I am not free solely because I can make choices without interference. I am truly free, only if that non-interference does not itself depend on another’s forbearance (what Pettit calls ‘formal’ freedom). Pettit believes that the principal justification for the traditional focus of the criminal law is that it constitutes a bulwark against domination. I will, in part, be considering the merits of this claim. Is the importance of the orthodox realm of the criminal law solely or mainly explained by the wish to protect people from domination? In short, the answer is that it is not. Across the board, the criminal law rightly protects us equally from threats to what Pettit calls ‘effective,’ as opposed to formal, republican freedom. I will develop my critique of Pettit’s account of criminal law, in part to raise questions about the role of ‘domination’ in political theory, and about whether it poses a significant challenge to liberal accounts of criminal law.

Download Full-text

Religious freedom and the ‘right to discriminate’ in the school admissions context: a neo-republican critique

Legal Studies ◽

10.1111/j.1748-121x.2011.00204.x ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 31 (4) ◽

pp. 615-643 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Eoin Daly ◽

Tom Hickey

Keyword(s):

Public Education ◽

Religious Freedom ◽

Religious Discrimination ◽

Religious Schools ◽

The Public ◽

Definition Of ◽

The Uk ◽

The Right ◽

Republican Theory ◽

Faith Schools

In law and discourse, it has typically been assumed that the religious freedom of state-funded religious schools must trump any competing right to non-discrimination on grounds of belief. For example, the Irish Constitution has been interpreted as requiring the broad exemption of denominational schools from the statutory prohibition on religious discrimination in school admissions. This stance is mirrored in the UK Equality Act 2010. Thus, religious discrimination in the public education context has been rationalised with reference to a ‘liberty-equality dichotomy’, which prioritises the integrity of faith schools' ‘ethos’, as an imperative of religious freedom. We argue that this familiar conceptual dichotomy generates a novel set of absurdities in this peculiar context. We suggest that the construction of religious freedom and non-discrimination as separate and antagonistic values rests on a conceptually flawed definition of religious freedom itself, which overlooks the necessary dependence of religious freedom on non-discrimination. Furthermore, it overstates the necessity, to religious freedom, of religious schools' ‘right to discriminate’. We argue for an alternative ordering of the values of religious freedom and non-discrimination – which we locate within the neo-republican theory of freedom as non-domination.

Download Full-text

On the People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy

The Philosophical Review ◽

10.1215/00318108-3683732 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 126 (1) ◽

pp. 140-146

Author(s):

Philipp Schink

Keyword(s):

Republican Theory ◽

Theory And Model

Download Full-text

From Reparations for Slavery to International Racial Justice: A Critical Republican Perspective

Global Justice : Theory Practice Rhetoric ◽

10.21248/gjn.9.2.117 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Magali Bessone

Keyword(s):

Nation State ◽

Racial Justice ◽

National Narrative ◽

Bottom Up ◽

Context Sensitive ◽

Republican Theory ◽

French Identity

This paper focuses on demands for reparations for colonial slavery and their public reception in France. It argues that this bottom-up, context-sensitive approach to theorising reparations enables us to formulate a critical republican theory of international racial justice. It contrasts the critical republican perspective on reparations with a nation-state centred approach in which reparations activists are accused of threatening the French republic’s sense of homogeneity and unity, thus undermining the national narrative on the French identity. It also rejects the liberal egalitarian perspective, which itself rejects reparations in favour of focusing on present disadvantages. In so doing, this paper illustrates how the notion of non-domination offers a superior way of conceptualising global racial injustices compared to more traditional distributive outlooks.

Download Full-text