This chapter illustrates how the Court synthesizes different methods of interpretation into a coherent opinion, and how concurring and dissenting justices often use the same methods of interpretation as the majority to draw very different conclusions. To achieve this, the book examines five landmark cases each from a different historical era and each dealing with a different area of constitutional law. The cases are Cohens v Virginia, the Slaughterhouse Cases, Powell v Alabama, New York Times v Sullivan, and Lee v Weisman.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.