Twenty-five years ago there was an extraordinary set of debates about the uses and abuses of literary theory in the interpretation of legal texts, and in particular whether texts constrain interpretive meaning. These debates involved many leading legal and literary scholars including Ronald Dworkin, Owen Fiss, and Richard Posner. But they almost always included Stanley Fish as the antagonist of scholars from a wide range of ideological and philosophical viewpoints. These debates were noteworthy for their pointed exchanges and for the fact that they often went through three or even four iterations. This panel brings back two of these combatants (no other word does justice to the spirited character of the exchanges) – Stanley Fish and Richard Posner – to reflect upon these debates and to consider what, if anything, we learned and what, if anything, of importance remains.
Business meeting at program conclusion.