The tradition of legal positivism in modern legal thought

pp. 57-71

in: William E. Conklin, The invisible origins of legal positivism, Berlin, Springer, 2001

Abstract

Why do jurists and officials consider certain norms/rules as legally binding? How is it possible for officials to insist that their role is not to question the political wisdom or substantive moral content of norms/rules? Why do lawyers and judges, to be more specific, observe from the sidelines, as it were, as if their norms/rules were impersonal and their decisions distanced?