1. Watching the Watchmen
1.1. Llewelyn
1.1.1. None, judges are free- justificatory function
1.2. Hart
1.2.1. Rule prior to decision
1.2.2. Description in application not making
1.3. Kelsen
1.3.1. Norms provide boundaries
1.4. Dworkin
1.4.1. No discretion- no problem
1.5. Limits
1.5.1. Statutes + Precident
1.5.2. On interpretation, rule and precident
2. Dworkin
2.1. Criticising Positivism
2.1.1. Donut Theory
2.1.2. There is more to law than its sources, eg principle not to profit from own wrongs
2.2. Law as interpretative
2.2.1. Reaching concrete conclusions (judge)
2.2.2. Writing general rules (legislator)
2.2.3. Talking legal theory (students)
2.2.4. Political Theory--> Right Answer
2.3. Law as integrity
2.3.1. Justifies coersion
2.3.2. Criticisms- Politics and Controversy
2.4. Rights as Trumps
2.4.1. Individual Rights over Collective Goals
2.4.2. Principles over Policies
3. Problems
3.1. Main: Relevancy, Classification, Interpretation
3.2. Making good rules
3.2.1. Difficulties
3.2.1.1. Overinclusive
3.2.1.2. Underinclusive
3.2.2. Function
3.2.2.1. Heuristic
3.2.2.2. Justificatory
3.3. Vagueness of rules
3.3.1. =Open texture
3.3.2. Classification is difficult
3.4. Interpretation
3.4.1. Literal
3.4.1.1. literal meaning
3.4.2. Golden
3.4.2.1. intention of legislator
3.4.3. Mischief
3.4.3.1. further a goal
3.4.4. how to choose a rule, facts v rule
3.5. Precedent
3.5.1. Choice
3.5.1.1. Naturally similar
3.5.1.2. Rationale
3.5.2. Obiter dicta (non essential)
3.5.3. Ratio decidenti (essential)