Reasoning Rights ― Comparative Judicial Engagement

This book is about comparative reasoning in human rights cases, exploring the questions: How is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such dramatically different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning? What techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence? What techniques are diverse? With contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, the book moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which too often dominate discussions of this kind. Instead, it seeks a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence in the content of reasons being developed by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional issues, cannot be attributable to them alone. The book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions. It is a fascinating study for all those interested in human rights law and legal reasoning.

Liora Lazarus is a Fellow in Law and University Lecturer in Law at St Anne's College, University of Oxford. Christopher McCrudden FBA is Professor of Equality and Human Rights Law, Queen's University Belfast; William W Cook Global Professor of Law at University of Michigan Law School; and a member of Blackstone Chambers.Nigel Bowles is Director of the Rothermere American Institute at the University of Oxford.