Edited by D. G. Smith and Andrew S. Gold
Chapter 18: Challenges to public fiduciary theory: an assessment
Over the past decade, a growing number of legal and political theorists have looked to ideas of trusteeship and fiduciary relations to explain foundational concepts associated with the rule of law, constitutional government, the role of judges and legislators, and the idea of public authority itself. Professor Evan Criddle and I have contributed to this literature by arguing that fiduciary principles can help explain administrative law and international law. This public fiduciary literature has attracted thoughtful and nuanced critiques. Some of the critiques reject the public fiduciary project outright, while others are of a more in-house variety, and take exception to some of the arguments I have defended, either solely or with Professor Criddle. In this chapter I reply to the thorough-going critiques of Timothy Endicott and Seth Davis, and the in-house criticism of Paul Miller.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.