Jeremy Waldron | |
|---|---|
![]() Waldron in 2010 | |
| Born | (1953-10-13)13 October 1953 (age 72) |
| Partner | Carol Sanger |
| Education | |
| Alma mater | University of Otago (BA,LLB) Lincoln College, Oxford (DPhil) |
| Doctoral advisor | Ronald Dworkin Alan Ryan |
| Philosophical work | |
| Era | Contemporary philosophy |
| Region | Western philosophy |
| School | Analytic Legal positivism |
| Main interests | Legal philosophy |
| Notable ideas | Criticism ofjudicial review The harm inhate speech lies in its defamatory nature Hate speech should not be protected by theFirst Amendment |
Jeremy Waldron (/ˈwɔːldrən/; born 13 October 1953) is a New Zealand legal philosopher. He holds a University Professorship at theNew York University School of Law, is affiliated with theNew York University Department of Philosophy, and was formerly theChichele Professor of Social and Political Theory atAll Souls College,Oxford University. Waldron also holds an adjunct professorship atVictoria University of Wellington. Waldron is regarded as one of the world's leading legal and political philosophers.[1][2][3]
Waldron attendedSouthland Boys' High School, and then went on to study at theUniversity of Otago, New Zealand, where he graduated with aB.A. in 1974 and anLL.B. in 1978. He later studied for a D.Phil. atLincoln College, Oxford, under legal philosopherRonald Dworkin and political theoristAlan Ryan; Waldron graduated in 1986.[4]
He taught legal and political philosophy atOtago (1975–78),Lincoln College, Oxford (1980–82), theUniversity of Edinburgh,Scotland (1983–87), the Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program atBerkeley Law (1986–96),Princeton University (1996–97), andColumbia Law School (1997–2006). He has also been a visiting professor atCornell (1989–90),Otago (1991–92), andColumbia (1995) Universities. AtNew York University, he teachesRule of Law,Jurisprudence, seminars onProperty and HumanDignity and regularly hosts the Colloquium on Legal, Social and Political Philosophy, founded by Ronald Dworkin and Thomas Nagel in 1987 and convened by Liam Murphy,Samuel Scheffler, and Waldron.[5]
Waldron gave the second series of Seeley Lectures atCambridge University in 1996, the 1999 Carlyle Lectures atOxford, the spring 2000 University Lecture atColumbia Law School, the Wesson Lectures atStanford University in 2004, the Storrs Lectures atYale Law School in 2007, and theGifford Lectures at theUniversity of Edinburgh in 2015. He was elected to theAmerican Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1998. In 2005, Waldron received an honorary doctorate from the University of Otago, hisalma mater. Waldron was elected to theAmerican Philosophical Society in 2015.[6] In 2019, a Professorial Chair in Jurisprudence was created in his name at the University of Otago.[7]
Waldron is aliberal and anormativelegal positivist. He has written extensively on the analysis and justification of private property and on the political and legal philosophy ofJohn Locke. He is an opponent ofjudicial review of legislation, and oftorture, both of which he believes to be in tension with democratic principles. He believes thathate speech should not be protected by theFirst Amendment.[8] Waldron has also criticised analyticlegal philosophy for its failure to engage with the questions addressed bypolitical theory. His later work is devoted to providing a non-religious and non-Kantian concept of humandignity, based on a thought experiment of leveling up all human beings to the high rank of nobility or aristocracy, thus constituting a single rank or caste. He has been working on this topic since he gave the Tanner Lectures on the subject in 2009, published in 2012 asDignity, Rank and Rights.[9]
Sandrine Baume has identified Jeremy Waldron andBruce Ackerman as leading critics of the "compatibility of judicial review with the very principles of democracy".[10] Baume identifiedJohn Hart Ely alongside Dworkin as the foremost defenders of this principle in recent years, while the opposition to this principle of "compatibility" were identified as Bruce Ackerman[11] and Waldron.[12] In contrast to Waldron and Ackerman, Dworkin was a long-time advocate of a moral reading of theUnited States Constitution, whose lines of support he sees as strongly associated with enhanced versions of judicial review in the federal government. A staunch defender of the principle of democratic legislation, in an article titled "The Core of the Case against Judicial Review", Waldron argued for a limited role for judicial review in a robust democratic government.[13] Waldron asserts that there is no inherent advantage to a judiciary's protection of rights than to a legislature's if (1) there is a broadly democratic political system with appropriate suffrage and process,[14] (2) there is a system of courts somewhat insulated from popular pressure and engaged in judicial review,[15] (3) there is a general commitment to rights,[16] and (4) there is disagreement as to the content and extent of rights.[17] Even so, Waldron does not argue against the existence of judicial review, which may be appropriate when there is institutional dysfunction. In this case, the defense of judicial review compatible with democracy is limited to remedies for that dysfunction and are neither unlimited nor universal. Waldron thus places his view of judicial review in the tradition of JusticeHarlan Fiske Stone.[18]
In a review of a 2015 book byCass Sunstein, Waldron stated that between the polarity represented by judges who can be "heroic" in the interpretation of their judgments and those who abstain, that his preference would be sympathetic to a position which could be described as "judicial minimalism". Waldron states his examples of such judges as includingSandra Day O'Connor,Ruth Ginsburg, andFelix Frankfurter.[19]
Waldron's longtime partner isColumbia Law School professorCarol Sanger.[20][21]
Books
Articles
| Academic offices | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by | Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory 2010–2014 | Vacant Title next held by Amia Srinivasan |