Overview

Known as the “swing justice,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy provided the key vote determining which way the Supreme Court would decide on some of the most controversial cases in US history. Though criticized for his unpredictable rulings, Kennedy also gained a reputation for his opinion writing and, more so, for his legal rhetoric. This book examines Justice Kennedy’s legacy through the lenses of rhetoric, linguistics, and constitutional law. Essays analyze Kennedy’s opinion writing in landmark cases such as Romer v. Evans, Obergefell v. Hodges, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Using the Justice’s rhetoric as an entry point into his legal philosophy, this volume reveals Kennedy as a justice with contradictions and blind spots—especially on race, women’s rights, and immigration—but also as a man of empathy deeply committed to American citizenship. A sophisticated assessment of Justice Kennedy’s jurisprudence, this book provides new insight into Kennedy’s legacy on the Court and into the role that rhetoric plays in judging and in communicating judgment. In addition to the editors, the contributors to this volume are Ashutosh Bhagwat, Elizabeth C. Britt, Martin Camper, Michael Gagarin, James A. Gardner, Eugene Garver, Leslie Gielow Jacobs, Sean Patrick O’Rourke, Susan E. Provenzano, Clarke Rountree, Leticia M. Saucedo, Darien Shanske, Kathryn Stanchi, and Rebecca E. Zietlow.

Full Product Details

9780271094847

Table of Contents

Reviews

The Rhetoric of Judging Well truly blazes a trail about how to take the rhetoric of legal reasoning out of the partisan, polarized world of legal journalism and bring it intelligibly into public discourse. Rhetoricians will gain copious insights about legal reasoning, and legal scholars will discover rhetorical tools for their research. -William M. Keith, coauthor of Beyond Civility: The Competing Obligations of Citizenship The Rhetoric of Judging Well offers a distinctive approach to legal rhetoric by providing a comprehensive and thorough account of the jurisprudence of a single, important justice. I know of no other book quite like it. -Austin Sarat, author of When Governments Break the Law: The Rule of Law and the Prosecution of the Bush Administration

The Rhetoric of Judging Well truly blazes a trail about how to take the rhetoric of legal reasoning out of the partisan, polarized world of legal journalism and bring it intelligibly into public discourse. Rhetoricians will gain copious insights about legal reasoning and legal scholars will discover rhetorical tools for their research. -William M. Keith, coauthor of Beyond Civility: The Competing Obligations of Citizenship The Rhetoric of Judging Well offers a distinctive approach to legal rhetoric by providing a comprehensive and thorough account of the jurisprudence of a single, important justice. I know of no other book quite like it. -Austin Sarat, author of When Government Breaks the Law: The Rule of Law and the Prosecution of the Bush Administration

Author Information

David A. Frank is Professor of Rhetoric at the University of Oregon. He is the coauthor of numerous books, including most recently Frames of Evil: The Holocaust as Horror in American Film. Francis J. Mootz III is Professor of Law at the University of the Pacific. He is the author of Law, Hermeneutics and Rhetoric and Rhetorical Knowledge in Legal Practice and Critical Legal Theory.

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available