Hart-Austin debate

The Hart-Austin debate centers on how courts interpret statutes, or laws enacted by legislatures. Hart argues that courts should interpret statutes based on their plain meaning and the intention of lawmakers, emphasizing a text-based approach. Austin, on the other hand, believes courts should interpret laws by considering broader social goals and the context in which they were created, allowing for more flexible interpretation. Essentially, the debate explores whether legal interpretation should be guided primarily by the language of the law (Hart) or by broader societal and policy considerations (Austin).