The Dialogic Rhetoric of the Supreme Court: An Interdisciplinary Analysis

Michael Kleine University of Arkansas at Little Rock ; Clay Robinson University of Arkansas at Little Rock

Abstract

A lawyer and a rhetorician pose and endeavor to answer from two perspectives the following question: How has the United States Supreme Court managed to endure and to maintain legitimacy for over two hundred years, given the potentially destabilizing cases it has had to decide? In this exploratory, interdisciplinary essay, the lawyer first examines the way the Court has been grounded, historically, in a common-law tradition and how its reliance on stare decisis seems to be amenable to most Americans. The rhetorician continues the exploration by linking the Court's common-law practice to issues of interpretive power, ethos, dialogism, and pragmatic philosophy and practice.

Journal
Rhetoric Review
Published
2008-09-18
DOI
10.1080/07350190802339283
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (21)

  1. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays
  2. Language and Symbolic Power
  3. A Grammar of Motives
  4. The Philosophy of Literary Form
  5. Temple International and Comparative Law Journal
Show all 21 →
  1. Of Grammatology
  2. The Public and Its Problems
  3. Taking Rights Seriously
  4. NYU Law Review
  5. Foucault, Michel. 1975. “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison”. New York: Random.
  6. 10.2307/1335588
  7. Legitimation Crisis
  8. The Federalist Papers
  9. The Transformation of American Law: 1780–1860
  10. Americanization of the Common-law: The Impact of Legal Change on Massachusetts Society, 1…
  11. 10.2307/797601
  12. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation
  13. The Philosophy of Peirce: Selected Writings
  14. Political Liberalism
  15. 10.1017/CBO9780511609213
  16. 10.2307/1600246