ADJUDICATING JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES IN CHICAGO AND TORONTO: LEGAL FORMALISM AND URBAN STRUCTURE
- 1 January 1986
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Urban Geography
- Vol. 7 (1) , 63-80
- https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.7.1.63
Abstract
It is argued in this paper that structural theories of local powers are inadequate as determinate explanations of urban form. This argument is developed through an interpretation of two jurisdictional disputes, one in Chicago, the other in Toronto. The legal bases of local powers are considered as are the languages and decision logic used by the courts in these two situations. At one level, the issue is one of the virtue or otherwise of the underlying political philosophy; especially liberalism. But, at another level, the issue is one of agency; the courts' capacities to fashion determinate interpretations of the proper scope of local power.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Following the Rules Laid down: A Critique of Interpretivism and Neutral PrinciplesHarvard Law Review, 1983
- The Critical Legal Studies MovementHarvard Law Review, 1983
- Community, Anarchy and LibertyPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1982
- Rights, Property, and CommunityEconomic Geography, 1982
- Dimensions of Local State AutonomyEnvironment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 1981
- The City as a Legal ConceptHarvard Law Review, 1980
- Is Wealth a Value?The Journal of Legal Studies, 1980
- On Continentalism, Distinctiveness, and Comparative Urban Geography: Canadian and American CitiesCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes, 1979
- Social Rules and Legal TheoryThe Yale Law Journal, 1972
- Location and Land UsePublished by Harvard University Press ,1964