The role of pragmatic argumentation in the justification of judicial decisions

In this contribution I address the prototypical argumentative patterns in which pragmatic argumentation is used in the context of legal justification in hard cases. first, I discuss the function and implementation of pragmatic argumentation in prototypical argumentative patterns in legal justification. I explain the dialectical function of the different parts of the complex argumentation by characterizing them as argumentative moves that are put forward in reaction to certain forms of critique. Then, on the basis of an exemplary case, the famous Holy Trinity case, I discuss the way in which the U.S. Supreme Court uses pragmatic argumentation in this case by showing how the court instantiates general prototypical argumentative patterns in light of the institutional preconditions of the justification in the context of the specific case. Keywords: Argumentative pattern, legal interpretation, legal justification, legal rule, pragmatic argumentation, prototypical argumentative pattern, statutory rule