Defrocking the courts: resolving 'cases or controversies,' not announcing transcendental truths.

The judiciary should no longer be regarded as an institution concerned with discerning transcendental truths. Instead, the principle of consent provides sufficient justification for judicial authority. Richard H. Gaskins in 'Burdens of Proof in Modern Discourse' shows how transcendental arguments-from-ignorance take the form of presumptions in legal doctrine. However, as Gaskins also suggests, the requirement for finality in the judicial process undercuts any claim that the judiciary is capable of determining transcendental truth. Decentralization of constitutional decision-making would follow from recognition of the importance of consent.