國立虎尾科技大學 |

Disciplining the Judicial Imagination : = The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Disciplining the Judicial Imagination :/
Reminder of title:	The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence.
Author:	Chanski, Sarah.
Description:	1 online resource (258 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-11A.
Subject:	Law. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798379589059

Disciplining the Judicial Imagination : = The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence.
Chanski, Sarah.

Disciplining the Judicial Imagination :The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence. - 1 online resource (258 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Northwestern University, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

Systems of accountability for police who violate the U.S. Constitution are broken. Among other mechanisms of accountability, the judicial system should provide a path for victims to obtain a remedy when their constitutional rights are violated. Yet unless the law is clearly established beyond debate, the doctrine of qualified immunity blocks civil suits against police officers and other state actors who violate someone's constitutional rights. This is the first study to examine this doctrine's rhetorical obligations, difficulties, and constraints. Fourth Amendment cases present unique opportunities to analyze the Supreme Court's constraints on definition and analogy and how judges navigate those constraints. Judges must identify the boundary between acceptable and excessive force, a fact-specific inquiry that requires the construction and comparison of events to justify conclusions about whether the law was clearly established.This dissertation argues that determinations about clearly established law rest upon layers of subjective definition and framing, and creative analogical arguments. These rhetorical acts are incompatible with the Supreme Court's requirement that decisions against law enforcement be beyond debate. I first argue that the doctrinal rules and instructional dimensions of the Court's decisions force courts to select frames and definitions designed to protect the officer and presume reasonableness while skirting constitutional questions about the rights and remedies for those injured. I then turn to analogical argument, exposing the doctrine's core contradiction. By requiring denials of immunity to be justified analogically and beyond debate, the Court virtually guarantees that immunity will be granted. Finally, I evaluate the rhetorical tools available to judges in the wake of this collapse and the Court's erasure of protections and remedies against uses of excessive force by police.The Court's rules and discourse attempt to discipline and instruct the judicial imagination to produce decisions that are beyond debate. But definition and analogy are inherently imaginative, creative practices composed of subjective framing and choices. By examining the justificatory language of representative qualified immunity opinions, this study develops a theory of the doctrine's application which ultimately guides recommendations for reform. This rhetorical study of the layers of value-laden decisions involved in definition and analogical justification clears a path for accepting the subjective nature of law.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798379589059Subjects--Topical Terms:

671705
Law.
Subjects--Index Terms:

ArgumentationIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Disciplining the Judicial Imagination : = The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence.
LDR:03982ntm a22004097 4500 001 1152577
005 20241209114600.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798379589059
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30487168
035 $a AAI30487168
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Chanski, Sarah. $3 1479611
245 1 0 $a Disciplining the Judicial Imagination : $b The Rhetoric of Fourth Amendment Qualified Immunity Jurisprudence.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (258 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-11, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Ray, Angela G.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Northwestern University, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Systems of accountability for police who violate the U.S. Constitution are broken. Among other mechanisms of accountability, the judicial system should provide a path for victims to obtain a remedy when their constitutional rights are violated. Yet unless the law is clearly established beyond debate, the doctrine of qualified immunity blocks civil suits against police officers and other state actors who violate someone's constitutional rights. This is the first study to examine this doctrine's rhetorical obligations, difficulties, and constraints. Fourth Amendment cases present unique opportunities to analyze the Supreme Court's constraints on definition and analogy and how judges navigate those constraints. Judges must identify the boundary between acceptable and excessive force, a fact-specific inquiry that requires the construction and comparison of events to justify conclusions about whether the law was clearly established.This dissertation argues that determinations about clearly established law rest upon layers of subjective definition and framing, and creative analogical arguments. These rhetorical acts are incompatible with the Supreme Court's requirement that decisions against law enforcement be beyond debate. I first argue that the doctrinal rules and instructional dimensions of the Court's decisions force courts to select frames and definitions designed to protect the officer and presume reasonableness while skirting constitutional questions about the rights and remedies for those injured. I then turn to analogical argument, exposing the doctrine's core contradiction. By requiring denials of immunity to be justified analogically and beyond debate, the Court virtually guarantees that immunity will be granted. Finally, I evaluate the rhetorical tools available to judges in the wake of this collapse and the Court's erasure of protections and remedies against uses of excessive force by police.The Court's rules and discourse attempt to discipline and instruct the judicial imagination to produce decisions that are beyond debate. But definition and analogy are inherently imaginative, creative practices composed of subjective framing and choices. By examining the justificatory language of representative qualified immunity opinions, this study develops a theory of the doctrine's application which ultimately guides recommendations for reform. This rhetorical study of the layers of value-laden decisions involved in definition and analogical justification clears a path for accepting the subjective nature of law.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Law. $3 671705
650 4 $a Communication. $3 556422
650 4 $a Rhetoric. $3 567738
653 $a Argumentation
653 $a Civil rights
653 $a Constitutional law
653 $a Excessive force
653 $a Qualified immunity
653 $a Rhetoric
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0681
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0459
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Northwestern University. $b Communication Studies. $3 1191110
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-11A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30487168 $z click for full text (PQDT)