Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Courts (1)
- Doctrinal reasoning (1)
- Dunes Sagebrush Lizard (1)
- Empirical legal studies (1)
- Endangered Species Act (1)
-
- Environmental Defense Fund (1)
- Environmental law (1)
- Environmentalism (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial behavior (1)
- Judicial decision making (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and humanities (1)
- Law and literature (1)
- Law and psychology (1)
- Legal decisionmaking (1)
- Legal history (1)
- Legal reasoning (1)
- Legalism (1)
- NGOs (1)
- New legal realism (1)
- Performance (1)
- Pragmatism (1)
- Pragtivism (1)
- Ritual (1)
- Rule of law (1)
- Wildlife (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Pragmatism, Pragtivism, And Private Environmental Governance, Joshua Galperin
Pragmatism, Pragtivism, And Private Environmental Governance, Joshua Galperin
Articles
This essay is an edited version of a talk presented at the 2017 J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Environmental Law Symposium on Private Environmental Governance at the George Washington University. It is adapted from a longer article entitled Trust Me, I’m A Pragmatist: A Partially Pragmatic Critique of Pragmatic Activism, in 42 Colum. J. Envtl. L. 425 (2017).
Doctrinal Reasoning As A Disruptive Practice, Jessie Allen
Doctrinal Reasoning As A Disruptive Practice, Jessie Allen
Articles
Legal doctrine is generally thought to contribute to legal decision making only to the extent it determines substantive results. Yet in many cases, the available authorities are indeterminate. I propose a different model for how doctrinal reasoning might contribute to judicial decisions. Drawing on performance theory and psychological studies of readers, I argue that judges’ engagement with formal legal doctrine might have self-disrupting effects like those performers experience when they adopt uncharacteristic behaviors. Such disruptive effects would not explain how judges ultimately select, or should select, legal results. But they might help legal decision makers to set aside subjective biases.