The apparent inconsistency between Locke’s commitment to legalism and his explicit endorsement of the extra-legal power of prerogative has confounded many readers. Among those who don’t ignore or dismiss it, the common approach is to qualify the role or scope of prerogative. The article advocates the opposite approach. It argues that Locke’s legalism should be understood within the context of his oft neglected conception of political liberty in terms of self-government. This not only allows for the reconciliation of Locke’s legalism with his endorsement of extra-legal powers, but also provides a fuller, more accurate account of the role of law and of political liberty in Locke’s theory.
ArnoldK (2007)
Domestic war: Locke’s concept of prerogative and implications for U.S. “wars” today.Polity39: 1–28.
2.
AshcraftR (1986) Revolutionary Politics and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
3.
BenthamJ (1962 [1816]) Anarchical fallacies. In: BowringJ (ed.) The Works of Jeremy Bentham.
2 vols.
New York:
Russell & Russell, pp. 489–536.
4.
BerlinI (1969) Two concepts of liberty. In: Berlin I Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 166–217.
5.
Blackstone W (2016[1765]) Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books, Vol I. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6.
CorbettRJ (2006)
The extraconstitutionality of Lockean prerogative.The Review of Politics68: 428–448.
7.
DunnJ (1967)
Consent in the political theory of John Locke. The Historical Journal10: 153–182.
8.
DunnJ (1982) The Political Thought of John Locke.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
9.
DworkinR (1985) A Matter of Principle.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
10.
DyzenhausD (2009) The compulsion of legality. In: RamajVV (ed.) Emergencies and the Limits of Legality.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 33–59.
11.
FatovicC (2004)
Constitutionalism and contingency: Locke’s theory of prerogative. History of Political Thought25: 276–297.
12.
FeldmanL (2013) Lockean prerogative: Productive tensions. In: FatovicCKleinermanBA (eds) Extra-Legal Power and Legitimacy: Perspectives on Prerogative.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp. 75–115.
13.
FeldmanLC (2008)
Judging necessity: Democracy and extra-legalism.Political Theory36: 550–577.
14.
FerejohnJPasquinoP (2004)
The law of the exception: A typology of emergency powers. The International Journal of Constitutional Law2: 210–239.
15.
GierkeO (1958 [1881]) Political Theories of the Middle Age.
Boston, MA:
Beacon Press.
16.
GrantR (1987) John Locke’s Liberalism.
Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
17.
GrossONi AolainF (2006) Law in Times of Crisis.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
18.
HalldeniusL (2003)
Locke and the non-arbitrary.European Journal of Political Theory2: 261–279.
19.
HarelASharonA (2018) Dignity, necessity, exception. In: AurielP (ed.) Rule of Crisis.
Cham: Springer, pp. 101–118.
20.
HobbesT (1994 [1651]) Leviathan. Edited by E Curley. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
21.
HolmesOW (1891) Agency. Harvard Law Review 4: 345–364.
22.
HookerR (1888 [1594]) Of the laws of ecclesiastical polity. In: KeblepJ (ed.) The Works of Mr Richard Hooker. Vol. 1,
Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
23.
KleinermanB (2007)
Can the prince really be tamed? Executive prerogative, popular apathy, and the constitutional frame in Locke’s Second Treatise.American Political Science Review101: 209–222.
24.
LockeJ (1963 [1823]) A letter concerning toleration. In: LockeJThe Works of John Locke.
Vol. V.
Aalen:
Scientia Verlag, pp. 1–58.
25.
LockeJ (1975 [1689]) An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Edited by PH Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
LockeJ (1988 [1689]a) First treatise. In: LaslettP (ed.) Two Treatises of Government.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 141–264.
27.
LockeJ (1988 [1689]b) Second treatise. In: LaslettP (ed.) Two Treatises of Government.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 265–428.
28.
MarshallJ (1994) John Locke: Resistance, Religion, and Responsibilities.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
29.
MartinichAP (2016) Authorization and representation in Hobbes’s Leviathan. In: MartinichAPHoekstraK (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp. 315–338.
30.
Mattie S (2005) Prerogative and the Rule of Law in John Locke and the Lincoln Presidency. The Review of Politics 67: 77–111.
31.
PasquinoP (1998)
Locke on king’s prerogative.Political Theory26: 198–208.
32.
PitkinH (1965)
Obligation and consent—I.American Political Science Review59: 990–999.
33.
PitkinH (1967) The Concept of Representation.
Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
34.
PufendorfS (1991 [1673]) On the Duty of Man and Citizen According to Natural Law. Edited by J Tully. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
RawlsJ (1999) A Theory of Justice.
Cambridge:
Belknap.
36.
RussellP (1986)
Locke on express and tacit consent.Political Theory14: 291–306.
37.
ScaliaA (1989)
The rule of law as a law of rules. University of Chicago Law Review56: 1175–1188.
38.
SharonA (2016) Domination and the rule of law. In: Sobel D Vallentyne P and Wall S (eds) Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy. Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 128–155.
39.
SharonA (2019) Populism and democracy: The realist challenge to deliberative democracy. European Journal of Philosophy 27: 359–76.
40.
SimmonsAJ (1994) The Lockean Theory of Right.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
41.
SimmonsJ (1976)
Tacit consent and political obligation. Philosophy & Public Affairs5: 274–291.
42.
SkinnerQ (1998) Liberty Before Liberalism.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
43.
SkinnerQ (2002a) From the state of princes to the person of the state. In: Skinner Q Visions of Politics Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 368–413.
44.
SkinnerQ (2002b)
Hobbes and the purely artificial person of the state.Journal of Political Philosophy7: 1–29.
45.
SkinnerQ (2005)
Hobbes on representation.European Journal of Philosophy13: 155–184.
46.
SkinnerQ (2007) Hobbes on persons, authors and representatives. In: Springborg P (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes’s Leviathan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 157–180.
47.
TuckR (1993) Philosophy and Government 1572–1651.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
48.
WaldronJ (1989)
The rule of law in contemporary liberal theory.Ratio Juris2: 79–96.
49.
WardL (2005)
Locke on executive power and liberal constitutionalism. Canadian Journal of Political Science38: 719–744.
50.
WolinSS (1987)
Democracy and the welfare state: The political and theoretical connections between Staatsräson and Wohlfahrtsstaatsräson.Political Theory15: 485–488.
51.
WoodEM (1992)
Locke against democracy: Consent, representation and suffrage in the two treatises.History of Political Thought13: 657–689.
