Read this: Scholars continue to debate whether the U.S. Constitution adopted a particular interpretation of the "rule of law," and if so, which one. For example, John Harrison asserts that the word "law" in the Constitution is simply defined as that which is legally binding, rather than being "defined by formal or substantive criteria," and therefore judges do not have discretion to decide that laws fail to satisfy such unwritten and vague criteria. Law Professor Frederick Mark Gedicks disagrees, writing that Cicero, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and the framers of the U.S. Constitution believed that an unjust law was not really a law at all.

What law professor says the Constitution does it meet either the formal or substantive?
What is the answer? (If it cannot be answered, return "unanswerable")
unanswerable
Läs detta: Forskare fortsätter att diskutera om USA:s konstitution antog en särskild tolkning av "rättsstatsprincipen", och i så fall vilken. John Harrison hävdar till exempel att ordet "lag" i konstitutionen helt enkelt definieras som det som är juridiskt bindande, snarare än att vara "definierat genom formella eller materiella kriterier", och därför har domarna inte handlingsfrihet att besluta att lagar inte uppfyller sådana oskrivna och vaga kriterier. Juridikprofessorn Frederick Mark Gedicks håller inte med, och skriver att Cicero, Augustinus, Thomas Aquinas och ramarna i USA:s konstitution trodde att en orättvis lag inte alls var en lag. Vilken lag professor säger konstitutionen uppfyller den antingen formellt eller materiellt? Vad är svaret? (Om det inte kan besvaras, återgälda "osvarbart")
Read this: Scientists continue to discuss whether the U.S. Constitution adopted a specific interpretation of the "rule of law", and if so which. For example, John Harrison claims that the word "law" in the Constitution is simply defined as being legally binding, rather than being "defined by formal or material criteria", and therefore the judges do not have the discretion to decide that laws do not meet such unwritten and vague criteria. Law professor Frederick Mark Gedicks disagrees, writing that Cicero, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and the framework of the United States Constitution believed an unfair law was not a law at all. What law does the professor say the Constitution fulfills it either formally or materially? What's the answer? (If it cannot be answered, repay "unresponsible")
Osvarsbart
Unanswerable