The phrase "a restrictive view" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe a perspective or opinion that limits understanding or consideration of broader possibilities.
Example: "The author's argument is based on a restrictive view of the issue, failing to account for alternative perspectives."
Alternatives: "a narrow perspective" or "a limited viewpoint."
And to combat any notion of a restrictive view, for the first time in its short history, all 11 justices of the supreme court will hear an appeal.
Coloradans voted in 2000 to legalize medical marijuana, but the dispensaries boomed this year, after the state decided against taking a restrictive view of the law and the Obama administration decided to end federal raids on state-sanctioned businesses.
But draft proposals due in the next few weeks are expected to show that the FAA continues to take a restrictive view, requiring drone operators to have experience flying manned aircraft and to keep drones within sight at all times.
Theirs is not a restrictive view of the past but an inclusive one, similar to Kazuo Ishiguro's in his nuanced depiction of Stevens, the aging butler-narrator of "The Remains of the Day".
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit adopted a restrictive view of the statute in United States v. Papagno, a case in which a government agency sought to recover $160,000 it spent on an internal investigation of suspected theft.
A restrictive view holds that only sensory experience has a proper phenomenal character, a what-it-is-like.
Instead they must adhere to a narrow, restrictive view of manhood: a worldview characterized by power, dominance, rationality, control, and aggression.
Companies hoped that the guidance would take a more restrictive view of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by providing clearer guideposts on when the statute does — and more important does not — apply to a transaction.
Rehnquist, like other conservatives, favoured a highly restrictive view of the tenth amendment - the final provision of the bill of rights that states that "powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people".
In effect, the court accepted the invitation of Solicitor General Paul D. Clement who, when he argued in defense of the statute last Oct. 30, urged the justices to impose "a more restrictive view" of the law's scope if they thought it reached too far.
Boorse (1975, 1976, 1977 , 1997 and his followers have opted for a more restrictive view of the causes of disease.
