ABSTRACT
We turn now to a group of theories which reject the mainstream idea of the law as a distinctive realm of reasons which is capable of constraining or controlling decisions according to its own inner ‘logic’ or ‘artificial reason’. These theories put the emphasis on external or non-legal factors as the explanation of judicial decision-making, and they are favourably disposed to the idea that judges should openly make decisions politically, that is, with an eye to their policy implications and future social consequences. While mainstream theorists stress the need for law to show fidelity to the past, their critics, in other words, wish to use law to improve the future.
