Show Summary Details

Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 25 March 2019

Abstract and Keywords

This chapter seeks to understand why historians often find amicus brief writing so vexed and how they have navigated the challenges it poses. It starts with a conceptual analysis of the historians’ amicus brief, in two parts, focused on the problem of expertise. Courts permit historians to participate as friends of the court because they believe that scholars’ knowledge of the past and its relationship to the present are valuable to their juridical work. Yet there are two troublesome questions about expertise that threaten this cross-disciplinary collaboration. One is the nature of historians’ expertise. The second is that the courts’ expertise also concern relating the past to the present, especially where precedent is concerned. The chapter then explores high-profile amicus briefs by historians since the Second World War and considers what these analyses tell us about the prospects for future amicus briefs.

Keywords: legal history, historians, amicus briefs, brief writing, expertise

Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us.