Search results

Nazi philosophy survived through Carl Schmitt and Martin Heidegger. I use Theodor Adorno's concept "jargon" to show how this philosophy was a key component in Nazi jurisprudence and Nazi law. We see similar jargon in Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. Certain "critical" responses to Nazi law perpetuate this jargon and thus (unwittingly) normalize far-right positions in law and policy. If we are determined that such atrocities never happen again, we must begin at the metaphysical/ontological level. I suggest that the key flaw in Heidegger's philosophy is that it does not place enough emphasis on human fallibility.

This article argues that Heidegger's concept "Authenticity" can be used to provide a justification for the doctrine of precedent beyond traditional predictability and equality arguments. This justification is based on an attitude towards existence itself rather than prescriptive claims about judging. The article demonstrates that a Heideggerian description of adjudication can allay the fears of writers such as Hobbes and Holmes that adherence to precedent might impede reason or justice. It further suggests that precedent presents judges with a rare opportunity to develop their own sense of reason or justice in adjudication. Particular emphasis is placed on efforts by adjudication to capture the nature of real entities. For illustrative purposes, use is made of the concept of a "lease" in the English case Ashburn Anstalt v. Arnold.