ABSTRACT
Critical Legal Studies (CLS) is an important, controversial theory that has emerged in recent years. It poses a challenge to constitutional theory at a number of points, arguing that law is contradictory and incoherent and that the "rule of law" is a myth. This chapter considers various arguments offered in defense of legal indeterminacy, along with the consequences of CLS rejection of the rule of law. Then, it considers the connections between legal indeterminacy and the CLS critique of rights and the related topic of moral objectivity, returning finally to reconsider the nature and possibility of the rule of law in light of the CLS critique. Skepticism about rights often rests on a mistaken conception of the nature of rights in general or of their political effects or else on unwarranted assumptions about the "subjectivity" of morality in general.
