[1]
‘Harold Berman, “Toward an Integrative Jurisprudence: politics, morality, history” (1988) 76 Calif. Law Rev. 779-802’ [Online]. Available: http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1891&context=californialawreview
[2]
‘L. Green “General Jurisprudence: A 25th Anniversary Essay”’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2005 [Online]. Available: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=19525091&site=ehost-live
[3]
‘Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Path of the Law’. [Online]. Available: http://www.constitution.org/lrev/owh/path_law.htm
[4]
H. L. A. Hart, ‘Law as the Union of Primary and Secondary Rules’, in The concept of law, 3rd ed., vol. Clarendon law series, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 79–99.
[5]
‘Hart, Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals’. [Online]. Available: http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~horty/courses/readings/hart-1958-positivism-separation.pdf
[6]
Dyzenhaus, D., ‘Austin, Hobbes, and Dicey’, Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 411–430, 2011 [Online]. Available: https://heinonline-org.bris.idm.oclc.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/caljp24&id=409
[7]
Vinx, L., ‘Austin, Kelsen, and the Model of Sovereignty’, Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 473–492, 2011 [Online]. Available: https://heinonline-org.bris.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/caljp24&i=471
[8]
‘Perry, “Hart’s Methodological Positivism”’. [Online]. Available: http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2133&context=faculty_scholarship
[9]
‘Waluchow, “Authority and the Practical Difference Thesis: A Defence of Inclusive Legal Positivism”’ [Online]. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/034F507ECC20FF415AF6AAF2D461CF56/S1352325200061024a.pdf/authority_and_the_practical_difference_thesis.pdf
[10]
S. Paulson, ‘Continental Normativism and its British Counterpart: How different are they?’, in Lloyd’s introduction to jurisprudence, 7th ed., London: Sweet and Maxwell, 2001, pp. 314–328.
[11]
Gardner, J., ‘Legal Positivism: 5 1/2 Myths’, American Journal of Jurisprudence, no. 46, pp. 199–228, 2001 [Online]. Available: https://heinonline-org.bris.idm.oclc.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/ajj46&i=203
[12]
J. Finnis, ‘Evaluation and the description of law’, in Natural law and natural rights, 2nd ed., vol. Clarendon law series, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 3–22.
[13]
M. Borowski, ‘Discourse, Principles, and the Problem of Law and Morality: Robert Alexy’s Three Main Works’, Jurisprudence, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 575–595, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.5235/204033211798716899.
[14]
Simmonds, Gur, Crowe, Rosler and Rundle, ‘Review Symposium: Freedom, Responsible Agency and Law’, Jurisprudence [Online]. Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5235/20403313.5.1.75
[15]
J. Crowe, ‘Natural Law Beyond Finnis’, Jurisprudence, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 293–308, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.5235/204033211798716871.
[16]
R. Kent Greenawalt, ‘“How Persuasive is Natural Law Theory?”’ [Online]. Available: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1614&context=ndlr
[17]
Gustav Radbruch, ‘Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law (1946).’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2006 [Online]. Available: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=20780215&site=ehost-live
[18]
A. W. B. Simpson, ‘Common Law and Legal Theory, The’, in Oxford essays in jurisprudence: second series, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973, pp. 77–99.
[19]
R. Dworkin, ‘Conventionalism’, in Law’s empire, Oxford: Hart, 1998, pp. 114–150.
[20]
Scott J. Shapiro, ‘“The Hart-Dworkin Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed”’. [Online]. Available: https://law.yale.edu/system/files/documents/pdf/Faculty/Shapiro_Hart_Dworkin_Debate.pdf
[21]
Lon L. Fuller, ‘“The Case of the Speluncean Explorers”’ [Online]. Available: https://turtletalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/the-speluncean-explorers.pdf
[22]
N. MacCormick, ‘Children’s rights: a test case for theories of right’, in Legal right and social democracy: essays in legal and political philosophy, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982, pp. 154–166 [Online]. Available: https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198255024.001.0001/acprof-9780198255024
[23]
H. L. A. Hart, ‘Are There Any Natural Rights?’, The Philosophical Review, vol. 64, no. 2, Apr. 1955, doi: 10.2307/2182586.
[24]
A. Gewirth, ‘Why Rights are Indispensable’, Mind, vol. XCV, no. 379, pp. 329–344, 1986, doi: 10.1093/mind/XCV.379.329.
[25]
‘Feinberg, “The Nature and Value of Rights”’ [Online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF00137935.pdf
[26]
W. Kymlicka and S. Donaldson, ‘Animals and the Frontiers of Citizenship’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 201–219, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1093/ojls/gqu001.
[27]
Raz, J. J., ‘Legal Rights’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 1984 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/oxfjls4&id=7
[28]
D. Lyons, ‘New Indian Claims and Original Rights to Land’, in Reading Nozick: essays on Anarchy, state and Utopia, Oxford: Blackwell, 1982, pp. 355–379.
[29]
R. Nozick, ‘Distributive justice (section II)’, in Anarchy, state, and utopia, Oxford: Blackwell, 1974, pp. 228–231.
[30]
R. Nozick, ‘Distributive justice (section I)’, in Anarchy, state, and utopia, Oxford: Blackwell, 1974, pp. 149–174.
[31]
S. Simmonds, ‘Utilitarianism’, in Central issues in jurisprudence: justice, law and rights, 4th ed., London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2013, pp. 17–46.
[32]
‘Nussbaum, “Rawls’s Political Liberalism: A Reassessment”’ [Online]. Available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00471.x/epdf
[33]
Denise Meyerson, ‘Three Versions of Liberal Tolerance: Dworkin, Rawls, Raz’, Jurisprudence [Online]. Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/20403313.2012.11423535?src=recsys
[34]
R. Cotterrell, ‘Why Jurisprudence Is Not Legal Philosophy’, Jurisprudence, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 41–55, Jul. 2014, doi: 10.5235/20403313.5.1.41.
[35]
B. Z. Tamanaha, ‘An Analytical Map of Social Scientific Approaches to the Concept of Law’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 501–535, 1995, doi: 10.1093/ojls/15.4.501.
[36]
R. Cotterrell, ‘Why Must Legal Ideas Be Interpreted Sociologically?’, Journal of Law and Society, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 171–192, Jun. 1998, doi: 10.1111/1467-6478.00086.
[37]
Donal Coffey, ‘Custom and Living Law’, Jurisprudence [Online]. Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/20403313.2012.11423536
[38]
‘“Law, State and Class Struggle” by Alan Hunt, Marxism Today, June 1976 - UNZ.org’. [Online]. Available: http://www.unz.org/Pub/MarxismToday-1976jun-00178
[39]
Carbado, D. W., ‘Critical What What’, Connecticut Law Review, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1593–1644, 2011 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/conlr43&id=1611
[40]
‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’. [Online]. Available: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf
[41]
P. Ireland, ‘History, Critical Legal Studies and the Mysterious Disappearance of Capitalism’, The Modern Law Review, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 120–140, Jan. 2002, doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.00371.
[42]
G. A. Cohen, ‘Freedom, Justice and Capitalism’, New Left Review, vol. 126, 1981 [Online]. Available: https://newleftreview.org/I/126/g-a-cohen-freedom-justice-and-capitalism
[43]
Tushnet, M., ‘Critical Legal Studies: A Political History’, Yale Law Journal, vol. 100, no. 5, pp. 1515–1544, 1991 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/ylr100&id=1529
[44]
David Andrew Price, ‘Taking Rights Cynically: A Review of Critical Legal Studies’, The Cambridge Law Journal, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 271–301, 1989 [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4507287?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
[45]
Menkel-Meadow, C., ‘Feminist Legal Theory, Critical Legal Studies, and Legal Education Or the Fem-Crits Go to Law School’, Journal of Legal Education, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 61–86, 1988 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/jled38&id=73
[46]
Cornell, D., ‘Loyalty and the Limits of Kantian Impartiality’, Harvard Law Review, vol. 107, no. 8, pp. 2081–2094, 1994 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/hlr107&id=2101
[47]
Crenshaw, K., ‘Twenty Years of Critical Race Theory: Looking back to Move Forward’, Connecticut Law Review, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1253–1354, 2011 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/conlr43&id=1611
[48]
‘Crenshaw, “Demarginalising the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics”’ [Online]. Available: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=uclf
[49]
A. P. Harris, ‘Race and Essentialism in Feminist Legal Theory’, Stanford Law Review, vol. 42, no. 3, Feb. 1990, doi: 10.2307/1228886.
[50]
Kline, M., ‘Race, Racism, and Feminist Legal Theory’, Harvard Women’s Law Journal, no. 12, pp. 115–150, 1989 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?public=false&handle=hein.journals/hwlj12&id=125
