Skip to content
ContemporaryAdvancedBook

Law and Disagreement

Jeremy Waldron

Constitutional theory

It is the leading philosophical case for legislative supremacy and against strong judicial review.

Synopsis

A constitutional-theory defense of legislatures and majority rule, arguing that because citizens reasonably disagree, lawmaking should rest with representative voting, not judges.

Core passage idea

Paraphrase · Modern copyrighted work

Since reasonable people disagree even about rights, the fairest way to settle disputes is by voting, not by handing the decision to courts.

It defends democratic legislation against judicial review as the legitimate response to deep moral disagreement.

To avoid a bubble

Pair with Democracy and Distrust.

Reading note

Read it as a sustained argument; Waldron's case against judicial review is the throughline.

Best paired with

Democracy and Distrust

Find this book