This chapter deals with the Court's use of structural reasoning. It begins with a discussion of three early cases in which the Court relied heavily on structural reasoning—Marbury v Madison, Martin v Hunter's Lessee, and McCulloch v Maryland. It then addresses big picture structural argument as well as the derivation of structural argument using Eleventh Amendment cases as an example. It discusses the relationship of structure to original understanding as well as to textual purpose. Next, it considers the Court's use of structural reasoning in several specific areas including judicial review, rights, and separation of powers. Finally, it discusses cases in which structural arguments come into conflict with each other.
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.