| Summary: | The article focuses on the concept of rule-of-law minimalism, arguing for a clearer understanding of its principles and defending it against various critiques. It distinguishes between "thick" and "thin" notions of the rule of law, with minimalism advocating for a formal, functional definition that emphasizes the conditions under which a regime is governed by law, independent of moral or substantive values. The author identifies three key criteria for minimalism: it describes the conditions for law's efficacy, remains agnostic about the relationship between law and morality, and is distinct from other normative concepts like democracy and equality. The article also addresses critiques from historicism and figures like Jeremy Waldron, ultimately asserting that minimalism provides a valuable framework for understanding the rule of law across different political contexts while maintaining its unique significance.
|
|---|