ABSTRACT

Jeffrey Goldsworthy recently claimed that parliamentary sovereignty itself expresses or endorses legal positivism. This claim inverts the relationship between law and legal theory, according to which legal theories are used to explain doctrinal, functional, institutional, or constitutional aspects of the law. Beyond claiming that positivism as a legal theory can helpfully explain sovereignty as a legal principle, Goldsworthy now argues that the legal doctrine of sovereignty is itself an articulation of positivism as a legal theory. This assertion, if correct, has significant implications for current understandings of the English constitution, constitutional theory, and legal theory. This essay argues that Goldsworthy’s conception of legal positivism cannot accurately describe the English conception of parliamentary sovereignty identified by the English rule of recognition.

摘要

杰弗里·戈兹沃西最近声称议会主权本身表达或支持法律实证主义。这一主张颠倒了法律与法律理论之间的关系，据此，法律理论被用来解释法律的教义、功能、制度或宪法方面。除了声称实证主义作为一种法律理论可以帮助将主权解释为法律原则之外，高兹沃西现在认为主权的法律学说本身就是实证主义作为一种法律理论的表达。这一断言如果正确的话，对当前对英国宪法、宪法理论和法律理论的理解具有重要意义。