Jurisprudence Commons^™

Between Dialogue And Decree: International Review Of National Courts, Robert B. Ahdieh

Robert B. Ahdieh

Recent years have seen dramatic growth in the number of international tribunals at work across the globe, from the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, to the Claims Resolution Tribunal for Dormant Claims in Switzerland and the International Criminal Court. With this development has come both increased opportunity for interaction between national and international courts and increased occasion for conflict. Such friction was evident in the recent decision in Loewen Group, Inc. v. United States, in which an arbitral panel constituted under the North American Free Trade Agreement found …

Celebrating Classical Rhetoric & Building Contemporary Law, Brian Larson

Brian Larson

Truth In Law, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

In this essay I offer a speech act analysis of truth evaluable content of legal prescriptions. The argument is based on two main frameworks: one, drawn from an analogy with truth in fiction, explains the prefixed nature of legal statements, and the second explores the propositional content of legal prescriptions as a species of exhortative speech acts. Overall, the essay suggests an interpretation of legal prescriptions that allows for the validity of standard legal syllogisms.

Varieties Of Vagueness In The Law, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

The main purpose of this essay is to articulate the different types of vagueness, and related linguistic indeterminacies, that we find in statutory language and to explain their different rationales. I argue that the various normative considerations involved in employing vague terms in legislation depend on the kind of vagueness in question. I show that while some cases of vagueness in law are concerned with fairly standard problems of borderline cases, other are not. I also argue that semantic vagueness can be distinguished from conversational vagueness, which we also find in law, and that vagueness in law should be clearly …

What Is The Right To Privacy?, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

A philosophical account of the right to privacy should explain what is the distinct interest that the right is there to protect, what it takes to secure it, and what would count as a violation of the right. In this paper I argue that the right to privacy is grounded on people’s interest in having a reasonable measure of control over ways in which they present themselves (and what is theirs) to others; I argue that in order to secure this kind of interest we need to have a reasonably secure and predictable environment about the flow of information. And …

The Dilemma Of Authority, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

The normal way to establish that a person has authority over another requires a rule-governed institutional setting. To have authority is to have power, in the juridical sense of the term, and power can only be conferred by norms constituting it. Power conferring norms are essentially institutional, and the obligation to comply with a legitimate authority’s decree is, first and foremost, institutional in nature. Thus, the main argument presented in this essay is that an explanation of practical authorities is a two-stage affair: the special, practical import of an authority can only be explained on the background of an institutional …

Textualism In Context, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

The main purpose of this essay is to show that the views about linguistic communication that make Textualism a plausible theory of what the law says, show why textualism is not nearly as helpful a theory of statutory interpretation as its proponents claim. The essay begins with a brief outline of what Textualism is, in light of its critique of Intentionalism and Purposivism; it then proceeds to explain the view of language, particularly asserted linguistic content, that is required to make sense of Textualism, and defends this view against a neo-Gricean critique; finally, the paper strives to show why those …

An Institutional Conception Of Authority, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

The essay develops a conception of practical authorities that ties their legitimacy to the particular nature of the social practice or institution in which practical authorities invariably operate, and the terms of the subjects’ participation in that practice. The main argument of the paper draws on the distinction between what it takes to have practical authority and what would make it legitimate. The general idea is that what it takes to have practical authority is always determined by a social or institutional practice, and thus the legitimacy of any given authority crucially depends on the nature of the practice and …

How Law Is Like Chess, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

This is an essay on the conventional foundations of law. The paper consists of three main arguments: first, that between HLA Hart’s view on the rules of recognition and Kelsen’s view on the basic norm, Hart’s account is more plausible. Second, it argues that the rules of recognition are not coordination conventions, as some commentators have claimed, but conventions of a different kind. Finally, the paper draws a distinction between deep and surface conventions, arguing that there are deep conventions determining what law is, and surface conventions of recognition determining what counts as law in a particular community. This distinction …

Farewell To Conceptual Analysis (In Jurisprudence), Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

I have two main purposes in this essay: First, to show that conceptual analysis is not nearly as central to legal philosophy as typically assumed. The main methodological thrust of analytical jurisprudence, and in particular of legal positivism, is reductionism, not conceptual analysis. Consequently, the main objections to legal positivism are best seen as arguing against the possibility of reduction. Second, I aim to show that the interpretivist challenges to analytical jurisprudence bark up the wrong tree in this respect, and actually fail to engage with the methodological stance they aim to replace. Along the way I offer a partial …

Can The Law Imply More Than It Says? -- On Some Pragmatic Aspects Of Strategic Speech, Andrei Marmor

Andrei Marmor

The content of the law is often determined by what legal authorities communicate. Both lawyers and philosophers of language know very well, however, that the full content of communication in a natural language often goes beyond the meaning of the words and sentences uttered by the speaker. Semantics and syntax are essential vehicles for conveying communicative content, but the content conveyed on particular occasions of speech is often pragmatically enriched by various factors. The standard model in the pragmatics literature, however, focuses on ordinary conversations, in which the parties are presumed to engage in a cooperative exchange of information. The …

Introduction: Globalization, Power, States, And The Role Of Law, Frank J. Garcia

Frank J. Garcia

On October 12, 2012 the Boston College Law Review and the Boston College International and Comparative Law Review held a joint Symposium entitled, “Filling Power Vacuums in the New Global Legal Order.” In three panel discussions and a keynote address by Anne-Marie Slaughter, a lively discourse on the impact of globalization on state power, the law, and the law’s ability to both reallocate and effectively restrain power ensued. This Introduction, and the works that follow in this symposium issue, document that discourse.

Cooperative Federalism In Biscayne National Park, Ryan Stoa

Ryan B. Stoa

Biscayne National Park is the largest marine national park in the United States. It contains four distinct ecosystems, encompasses 173,000 acres (only five percent of which are land), and is located within densely populated Miami-Dade County. The bay has a rich history of natural resource utilization, but aggressive residential and industrial development schemes prompted Congress to create Biscayne National Monument in 1968, followed by the designation of Biscayne National Park in 1980. When the dust settled, Florida retained key management powers over the Park, including joint authority over fishery management. States and the federal government occasionally share responsibility for regulating …

The Role Of International Actors In Promoting Rule Of Law In Uganda, Joseph M. Isanga

Joseph Isanga

African conflicts have been caused in part by regimes that do not respect democracy. Uganda is an illustrative case. International actors have played along under an undeclared policy of constructive engagement, but this has essentially served only to delay democratic evolution. As a result, Ugandan leaders have become increasingly autocratic. In such circumstances, reliance on the military and personal rule based on patronage--as opposed to democracy and the rule of law-have become critically important in governance. Yet forceful measures often only beget forceful reactions. The best hope for democracy is for courts to enforce the will of the people as …

The "Common Word," Development, And Human Rights: African And Catholic Perspectives, Joseph M. Isanga

Joseph Isanga

Africa is the most conflict-ridden region of the world and has been since the end of the Cold War. The Continent's performance in both development and human rights continues to lag behind other regions in the world. Such condi­tions can cause religious differences to escalate into conflict, particularly where religious polarity is susceptible to being exploited. The sheer scale of such con­flicts underscores the urgency and significance of interreligious engagement and dialogue: 'Quantitative and qualitative analysis based on a ... database including 28 violent conflicts show that religion plays a role more frequently than is usually assumed.' This ambivalent character …

African Courts And Separation Of Powers: A Comparative Study Of Judicial Review In Uganda & South, Joseph M. Isanga

Joseph Isanga

Achieving political stability in a transitional democracy is a fundamental goal, the resoluteness of which is in part maintained by courts of judicial review that are independent from political bias and devoid of deference to traditionally more powerful branches of government. The recent democratic transitions occurring in the African nations of South Africa and Uganda provide a unique, contemporary insight into the formation of a constitutional jurisprudence. This study is an examination of pivotal cases decided by the Constitutional Courts of South Africa and Uganda, the roles that these decisions play in political stability, and the potential for political bias …

African Judicial Review, The Use Of Comparative African Jurisprudence, And The Judicialization Of Politics, Joseph M. Isanga

Joseph Isanga

This Article examines African constitutional courts’ jurisprudence—that is, jurisprudence of courts that exercise judicial review—and demonstrates the increasing role of sub-Saharan Africa’s constitutional courts in the development of policy, a phenomenon commonly referred to as 'judicialization of politics' or a country’s 'judicialization project.' This Article explores the jurisprudence of constitutional courts in select African countries and specifically focuses on the promotion of democracy, respect for human rights, and the rule of law, and presupposes that although judges often take a positivist approach to adjudication, they do impact policy nevertheless. The use of judicial review in Africa has been painfully slow, …

'A Body Of Sound Practical Common Sense': Law Reform Through Lay Judges, Public Choice Theory, And The Transformation Of American Law, Gregory S. Sergienko

Greg Sergienko

... [T]hree of the earliest and most influential proponents of the argument that public choice theory implies that courts produce better rules than legislators are Judge Frank Easterbrook, Judge Richard Posner, and Justice Antonin Scalia. These proponents of social choice theory conclude from this that judicial decisions are more to be trusted than legislative decisions and therefore favor a variety of devices to expand judicial power. These include interpreting statutes restrictively, which leaves the decision up to the pre-existing judge-made law; interpreting statutes in a common-law fashion, which allows judges their traditional rule-making powers; and ignoring legislative intent, which leaves, …

Court Review: Volume 44, Issue 3 – Selected Criminal Law Cases In The Supreme Court’S 2007-2008 Term, And A Look Ahead, Charles D. Weisselberg

Charles D Weisselberg

The U.S. Supreme Court’s October 2007 Term had a substantial and notable criminal docket. There were very significant Second, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment decisions as well as important rulings relating to basic habeas corpus principles and federal statutes. This article provides a selected overview of the Term with a heavy emphasis on those cases that may have the greatest impact upon the states. The article also suggests some questions left open by the Court’s opinions and provides some preliminary indications of how several decisions are being received in state and federal courts. It concludes with a preview of some cases …

Semantic Vagueness And Extrajudicial Constitutional Decisionmaking, Anthony O'Rourke

Anthony O'Rourke

No abstract provided.

Formal And Informal Amendment Of The United States Constitution, Richard S. Kay

Richard Kay

Constitutional Clause Aggregation And The Marijuana Crimes, Scott W. Howe

Scott W. Howe

Artificial Intelligence And Role-Reversible Judgment, Stephen E. Henderson, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Stephen E Henderson

The Rejection Of Horizontal Judicial Review During America's Colonial Period, Robert J. Steinfeld

Robert Steinfeld

No abstract provided.

Ideal Theory And The Limits Of Historical Narrative, Anthony O'Rourke

Anthony O'Rourke

Some intellectual concepts that once played a central role in America’s constitutional history are, for both better and worse, no longer part of our political language.[1] These concepts may be so alien to us that they would remain invisible without carefully reexamining the past in order to challenge the received narratives of America’s constitutional development.[2] Should constitutional theorists undertake this kind of historical reexamination? If so, to what extent should they be willing to stray from the disciplinary norms that govern intellectual history? And what normative aims can they reasonably expect to achieve by exploring ideas in our …

Counter-Rejoinder: Justice Vs. Justiciability?: Normative Neutrality And Technical Precision, The Role Of The Lawyer In Supranational Social Rights Litigation, Tara J. Melish

Tara Melish

An important debate is currently underway in the inter-American human rights system involving the proper approach litigators, adjudicators, and advocates should take to supranational litigation of economic, social and cultural rights. Centered on questions of jurisdiction and the proper characterization and limits of justiciability, its resolution has tremendous implications for the tools available to on-the-ground advocates, their real-world effectiveness and sustainability in adjudicatory and advocacy contexts alike, and the rationalization of the system's developing jurisprudence over the long-term.

This article book-ends a trilogy of pieces appearing in the NYU Journal of International Law and Politics by two sets of authors, …

Res Judicata As Requisite For Justice, Kevin M. Clermont

Kevin M. Clermont

From historical, jurisprudential, and comparative perspectives, this Article tries to synthesize res judicata while integrating it with the rest of law. From near their beginnings, all systems of justice have delivered a core of res judicata comprising the substance of bar and defense preclusion. This core is universal not because it represents a universal value, but rather because it responds to a universal institutional need. Any justice system must have adjudicators; to be effective, their judgments must mean something with bindingness; and the minimal bindingness is that, except in specified circumstances, the disgruntled cannot undo a judgment in an effort …

Court Review: Volume 41, Issue 3-4 - Judicial Independence: The Freedom To Be Fair, Steve Leben, Michael R. Mcadam, Leo Bowman, Kevin S. Burke, Michael Cicconetti, Malcom Feeley, Jack Ford, Gayle Nachtigal, Tam Nomoto Schumann, William C. Vickrey

Malcolm Feeley

The final panel discussion at the National Forum on Judicial Independence was moderated by Jack Ford, host of the syndicated Public Broadcasting System program, Inside the Law. The discussion explores topics of judicial independence in a manner designed for use with the public at large and formed the basis for the onehour PBS program, “Judicial Independence: The Freedom to Be Fair.” Panelists were Leo Bowman, chief judge of the District Court in Pontiac, Michigan, Kevin Burke, district judge and former chief judge of the Hennepin County (Minn.) District Court, Michael Cicconetti, judge of the Painesville (Ohio) Municipal Court, Malcolm Feeley, …

Court Review: Volume 41, Issue 3-4 - Friends Of The Court? The Bar, The Media, And The Public, Steve Leben, John Russonello, Malcom Feeley

Malcolm Feeley

The fourth panel discussion at the National Forum on Judicial Independence explores the way the public thinks about judicial independence and ways in which the media and members of the bar may affect judicial independence. The discussion was led by then-AJA secretary Steve Leben, a state general-jurisdiction trial judge from Kansas. Panelists were John Russonello, a pollster and consultant to nonprofit organizations, political campaigns, and other clients, and Malcolm Feeley, professor at the Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California-Berkeley. The National Forum on Judicial Independence was supported by a generous grant from the Joyce Foundation of …

In (Faint) Praise Of The Large Aps: Comments On Marc Galanter, Planet Of The Aps, Meir Dan-Cohen

Meir Dan-Cohen

No abstract provided.