Comments on: Jeremy Waldron (and F. Scott Fitzgerald?) on the Rule of Law http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/jeremy_waldron.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Patrick S. O'Donnell http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/12/jeremy_waldron.html/comment-page-1#comment-51362 Patrick S. O'Donnell Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:57:01 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/12/jeremy-waldron-and-f-scott-fitzgerald-on-the-rule-of-law.html#comment-51362 I think Waldron's point (at any rate, his conclusion)--and yours too--was earlier and well made by Timothy A.O. Endicott in his indispensable (i.e., for people interested in such questions) book, Vagueness in Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), which makes clear that it is an issue deeper (or at least more) than the notion of "contested concepts." Vagueness and indeterminacy (of degree) are ineluctable features of the rule of law ('ineliminable from a legal system') and do not necessarily undermine the rule of law ideal. Please see Endicott for the complete argument. I think Waldron’s point (at any rate, his conclusion)–and yours too–was earlier and well made by Timothy A.O. Endicott in his indispensable (i.e., for people interested in such questions) book, Vagueness in Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), which makes clear that it is an issue deeper (or at least more) than the notion of “contested concepts.”

Vagueness and indeterminacy (of degree) are ineluctable features of the rule of law (‘ineliminable from a legal system’) and do not necessarily undermine the rule of law ideal.

Please see Endicott for the complete argument.

]]>